[haiku-development] Re: package / non-packaged (was Haiku, Inc. etc.)
- From: Augustin Cavalier <waddlesplash@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 10:41:26 -0500
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Donn Cave <donn@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> That seems like asking for trouble - provide a non-packaged alternative
> to the package system, but say (to yourselves) it's not really to be used.
> So you can pull it later, and say no one should have using it? It seems
> unlikely that there will ever be any need to lock the system down to
> packaged files only, why not accept this as a virtue of the design?
>
No. Having non-packaged is very useful to developers, who may want to test
software (e.g. me, when working on tracker_layout) without having to build
an entire package for it. Thus it will always be there, even if only for
that.
Release builds, that's up in the air. It might be there, or it might not
be. Or we might leave it in the PATH but not have it created...
> I'll put a port in non-packaged because right off hand I don't see how
> to package it. Big, distribution with a complicated makefile system,
> that (of course) installs itself to $prefix/bin etc., and incorporates
> those paths into itself. It would be cool if I could set up a writeable
> /boot/system/ pkgfs pkg, run 'make install' and voilá my package contents
> in that package overlay, but that isn't an option, is it?
>
That is essentially what HaikuPorter does already, except it tells apps to
install to "/packages/<name>-<version>/.self/".
-Augustin
Other related posts:
