Re: [Openbsdbinpatch-misc] Patch for /var/db/binpatch stuff

[<ger...@gm...>]

2007/1/17, Mike Erdely <mi...@er...>:
> Gerardo Santana G=F3mez Garrido wrote:
> > 2007/1/16, Mike Erdely <mi...@er...>:
> >> I think the goal should be to keep binpatch simple.
> > Agreed, totally.
> >
> > the patch_* tools would be a pair of convenient scripts, nothing more,
> > that handle patch information as mentioned before.
>
> If that's the case, creation of the /var/db/binpatch files should not dep=
end on
> things available just for convenience, IMO.
>
> > We can package those scripts in a binpatch package as you suggest, but
> > it will not prevent anybody to just untar them.
>  > And still I think that a patch_add script should handle /var/db/binpat=
ch.
>
> What you're suggesting, though is that using a script and using tar will =
present
> different results.
>
> -ME

I see your point.

Our difference arises probably from my belief that /var/db/binpatch is
a convenience too.

But even if I were the first patchtools enthusiast and supporter, I'd
look back to the ports subsystem. I don't see a target in bsd.port.mk
that handles /var/db/pkg directly; it's the pkgtools that handle
/var/db/pkg.

--=20
Gerardo Santana