Bug 64342
| Summary: | Assumed content of PATH is not defined in Porter's Handbook | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Documentation | Reporter: | Martin Horcicka <horcicka> |
| Component: | Books & Articles | Assignee: | Port Management Team <portmgr> |
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | ||
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | Latest | ||
| Hardware: | Any | ||
| OS: | Any | ||
State Changed From-To: open->feedback The only existing usage of a dependency on portupgrade (in pkg_cutleaves) seems to use the latter form. I will forward a copy of this on to portmgr@ for possible comments. Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-doc->portmgr This should be discussed amongst portmgr, it seems. I removed the '.' entry some time ago, and added /usr/local/sbin in response to a number of ports that started assuming it was in PATH. Kris Hi Kris,
Kris Kennaway (2004-10-15 19:30 -0400):
> I removed the '.' entry some time ago, and added /usr/local/sbin in response
> to a number of ports that started assuming it was in PATH.
that's great, thanks. Anyway, information about the content of PATH that a
porter can expect to be available during the "which -s" in dependency checking
should be noticed in Porter's Handbook.
Thank you.
Martin
State Changed From-To: feedback->closed This is now properly documented. |
In section "5.7.2 RUN_DEPENDS" of Porter's Handbook there is mentioned usage of "which -s" to "determine if the program exists in the user's search path". Unfortunately I cannot see any definition of PATH that porters should assume so that they could choose the right form of dependency - e.g.: RUN_DEPENDS= portupgrade:${PORTSDIR}/sysutils/portupgrade or RUN_DEPENDS= ${LOCALBASE}/sbin/portupgrade:${PORTSDIR}/sysutils/portupgrade In scripts used on clusters for package building I have found the following: /usr/ports/Tools/portbuild/scripts/dopackages: PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin /usr/ports/Tools/portbuild/scripts/portbuild: PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:. I am not very sure which of these definitions is actually used during the building but I'd bet on that one from portbuild. BTW, does anyone know why there is that dot (actual directory) at the end of the list? It is not very typical. And why is /usr/local/sbin missing there? Fix: Port managers should be asked about the value of PATH that porters should assume for building packages at building clusters and that information should appear on some suitable place in Porter's Handbook.