DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2006-08
On 2006-08-15 21:02, Vivek Ayer wrote:
On 8/14/06, Erik Wikström <erik-wikstrom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2006-08-14 19:20, Francis Gudin wrote:
> On 14-08-2006, Erik Wikström <erik-wikstrom@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Haven't looked at pacman but I seem to recall that it's a utility for
>> managing pkgsrc packages and as such it (probably) used the pkgsrc
>> infrastructure to perform it's magic. Thus it ought to work seamlessly
>> with the pkgsrc tools. At least as long as nothing breaks in the middle
>> of operation.
> You may think about a different 'man'agement tool. Here's an excerpt
> from the wiki:
Ah, I was thinking of pkgmanager.
> Pacman was ported from Archlinux.
> The system is similar to ports/pkgsrc but uses build description files
> written in bash, called PKGBUILD, instead of Makefiles.
> I guess pkgsrc could coexist with another third-party software
> management tool, as long as both don't share anything on the filesystem.
> pkgsrc keeps all its files under /usr/pkg by default; if pacman is able
> to do so under another hierarchy, chances are it could work.
> Still to define how pacman would be better, or what pkgsrc lacks wrt
> pacman ? IMO, improving pkgsrc support for DragonFly is much more useful:
> sharing with numerous platforms (not Linux-centric), clean framework, etc.
Yes, it should be possible, but it will be harder to administer (two
systems instead of one) and I wonder how many of the packages that will
work under DFly.
I usually don't post in DragonFly users lists, but I have one thing to
say. I run my dragonfly system in qemu on top of Archlinux and I would
just like to say that pacman has made my package management life so
much easier. It would be so great if someone could port to Dfly.
However, the only awkward thing is the bash script used. Many dfly
users don't prefer to use bash, but I'm sure it wouldn't be that hard
to write stuff in a different script. I'm willing to help port it to
dfly since I use it currently anyways. Thanks.
My concern was mostly the fact that many of the applications might need
slight patching before compiling on DragonFly (take a look at the work
done to make pkgsrc packages work). pacman not being the official
packaging system might have problems with a smaller user-base creating
these patches and testing. On the other hand much work from pkgsrc might
be applicable more or less without modification.