Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

Make the base package each have a different origin.
Needs ReviewPublic

Authored by mat on Dec 30 2016, 1:54 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Dec 31 2023, 11:59 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jul 8 2023, 4:48 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jun 16 2023, 9:45 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Jun 3 2023, 11:31 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jan 6 2023, 9:09 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Jan 6 2023, 5:48 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Apr 23 2017, 11:50 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Apr 19 2017, 12:16 AM
Subscribers

Details

Reviewers
brd
gjb
matthew

Diff Detail

Lint
Lint Passed
Unit
No Test Coverage
Build Status
Buildable 6486
Build 6715: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

mat retitled this revision from to Make the base package each have a different origin..
mat updated this object.
mat edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)
mat added reviewers: gjb, matthew, brd.

This is so that pkg version works correctly.

Without this, it says:

FreeBSD-atm-11.0_4                 ?   orphaned: base
FreeBSD-casper-11.0_4              ?   orphaned: base
FreeBSD-casper-development-11.0_4  ?   orphaned: base
FreeBSD-ccdconfig-11.0_4           ?   orphaned: base
FreeBSD-clibs-development-11.0_4   ?   orphaned: base
FreeBSD-docs-11.0_4                ?   orphaned: base
...

'origin' is a hangover from the old pkg_tools days, and as currently implemented in pkg(8) it
assumes (too much) that packages are built from the ports, or something like that. However, until
origin behaviour in pkg(8) can be reworked, this seems reasonable.

Please let's not go through each UCL file for this just yet. There are inherent problems outstanding affecting if/where/why UCL files will be in-tree or autogenerated.

Ooops. Wrong review.

Considering the recent changes in ports to do with FLAVORS, which has definitively broken the 1-to-1 relation between pkg name and port origin, is this change still desirable?

Well, these package are not flavors, they're more subpackages and I do not know yet how subpackages will be implemented :-)