pkgsrc-Bugs archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: pkg/37608: audit-packages
The following reply was made to PR pkg/37608; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Kazushi (Jam) Marukawa <jam%pobox.com@localhost>
To: Adrian Portelli <adrianp%stindustries.net@localhost>,
gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc:
Subject: Re: pkg/37608: audit-packages
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 08:01:16 +0900
On Dec 27, 15:24, Adrian Portelli wrote:
> Subject: Re: pkg/37608: audit-packages
> jam%pobox.com@localhost wrote:
> > Third one is about the treatment of sbin. The audit-packages is
> > installed into /usr/pkg/sbin. However, I don't want to put
/usr/pkg/sbin
> > directory in my PATH env-variable. This is my policy. A program placed
> > under sbin is for privileged users. So, I don't want to put sbin in my
> > PATH env-variable. However, pkgsrc makefiles require audit-packages by
> > default. Is it possible to install audit-packages program into
/usr/pkg/bin
> > instead of /usr/pkg/sbin? Or, is it possible to write audit-packages
> > program with full path?
>
> Just to clarify a point: pkgsrc Makefile(s) don't 'require'
> audit-packages by default it's entirely optional. The pkgsrc
> infrastructure will function just fine without audit-packages.
Yes. That's true.
> To answer your original issue of audit-packages and
> download-vulnerability-list and the system default ${PATH} I'm in the
> middle of addressing this at the moment in pkgsrc HEAD. I'd hoped to get
> it into 2007Q4 but unfortunately I didn't get all the changes in. Over
> the next few weeks I'll commit the necessary changes so that pkgsrc does
> not expect audit-packages and/or download-vulnerability-list to be on
> your ${PATH}.
Thank you. It is very nice for me to run audit-packages
from Makefile automatically.
In addition, please close this PR whenever. Thanks.
Regards,
-- Kazushi
Slang is language that takes off its coat, spits on its hands, and goes
to work.
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index