[nycbug-talk] pkgng question

[Mark Saad]

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Glen Barber <gjb at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:33:12AM -0400, Mark Saad wrote:
>> > Hmm.  I use x11/slim with Intel i915kms no problem.  I'd really like to
>> > see the "real" problem fixed in this case then.
>> >
>>
>> I agree but its still a good question, can a package be blacklisted or
>> held at a particular version . What about the case of an in house
>> package
>> like marks_custom_thing.tbz . Say I have a newer version in the repo
>> but I do not want to upgrade to it on some servers.
>
> In such a case, you would have a port that pkg(8) is not aware of.
>
> What I do for my machines is create a misc/$(hostname -s) port, which
> I then use as a meta-port for software I want installed on a particular
> machine.

Glen I worked at a shop that used this method ; are there any
guide/handbook/wiki pages describing how to make your own ports ?




>
>> > For KMS to work, iirc, you need WITH_NEW_XORG and WITH_KMS in make.conf;
>> > do you have these?
>> >
>>
>> Glen , I hate to say it but I am not using ports to build this stuff.
>> I migrated to using all binary packages on one box. I am just pulling
>> down what PC-BSD has up on their pkgng repo. I would guess they are
>> using the with kms knobs to build their pkgs, since I am loading all
>> of the kms modules.
>>
>
> No, because WITH_NEW_XORG is not default, and as far as I recall,
> neither is WITH_KMS.
>
> So, here's the problem with your x11/slim situation - an unfortunate
> fact is that binary packages are not "one size fits all."  An excellent
> example is lang/php5, where if you want the apache module included, you
> need to build the port.
>
> This is the primary reason I roll my own packages, using
> ports-mgmt/tinderbox.
>
> This way, I can be certain all of the options I want are enabled, and
> options I do not want or do not need are disabled.
>
> Going back to your original question, my 'misc/$(hostname -s)' solution
> was going to be my suggestion.  But, since boost-libs is a dependency of
> other ports (not a dependent port), this is much more difficult.
>
> To worsen your boost-libs situation, you will eventually run into
> a situation where a 'pkg upgrade' will blow up because your
> locally-patched version is not up-to-date.  I'm not saying this _can_
> happen - I am saying this _will_ happen.  Unfortunately, I do not think
> my solution will work for you.
>
> It is never advisable to mix ports and packages.  This was the case with
> pkg_install(1), and remains true with pkg(8).
>
> Glen

>

What about using two repos . Repo 1 is the public FreeBSD repo , Repo
2 is a private repo with local versions of the packages we nee
d customized . Yum currently has support for this , as far as I can
tell Pkgng doesn't


-- 

Mark Saad | mark.saad at ymail.com