[Tor-BSD] OpenBSD tor -stable/-alpha split port
teor2345 at gmail.com
Sun Nov 12 14:39:12 EST 2017
> On 13 Nov 2017, at 06:33, George Rosamond <george at ceetonetechnology.com> wrote:
>>>> On 13 Nov 2017, at 06:19, George Rosamond <george at ceetonetechnology.com> wrote:
>>> Alexander Nasonov:
>>>> George Rosamond wrote:
>>>>> Greetings all.
>>>>> FYI, this was just submitted to OpenBSD ports.
>>>> I committed tor-dev to pkgsrc-wip. You should be able to install it
>>>> without deinstalling your regular net/tor package because I install
>>>> files to different directories or with a different suffix:
>>>> $ pkg_info -L tordev
>>>> Information for tordev-0.3.2.4:
>>> It seems NetBSD didn't have tor-alpha/-dev in the pkgsrc before. I
>>> didn't realize that.
>>> I'm wondering why someone would run both -stable and -alpha though. I
>>> think the logic with having separate ports for them is that most people
>>> would run one or the other, and not both. No?
>> I can imagine it being useful for testing: if you have 4 relays on a box, run
>> the late alphas or new stable on one, and then switch them all over when
>> you're happy.
>> (I'd have multiple versions installed for testing as a Tor developer, but
>> that's a pretty specialised use case.)
> Okay, I can see the use-case. FreeBSD puts "CONFLICTS_INSTALL" in the
> Makefile between -stable and -alpha.
> Does it make sense to allow both in the ports trees?
> What do the Linux package systems do?
They call them all "tor", which is the most helpful thing to do for the majority
use case, because then the user can install whichever series they like, and
all their scripts still work.
Unless there's a symlink from tor to tor-dev when tor isn't installed?
(The other option is an alternatives system, where each series gets a separate
name, and the selected alternative is symlinked to "tor". macOS Homebrew
does this by default for all packages.)
More information about the Tor-BSD