Quentin Garnier [Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 08:50:00AM +0200]:
> Le Fri, 15 Aug 2003 02:55:39 +0200
> Michal Pasternak a ecrit :
> [...]
> > 1. Suppose a package is built as a dependency. I'd expect behaviour
> [...]
> >    As it came out, dependencies are not cleaned automatically, I have to
> >    ,,make clean-depends''. Why this is default behaviour? What are the
> >    pro's of not cleaning dependencies automatically?
> 
> I don't why it should clean the dependency, but not the package it's
> building. Besides, make package needs a built package in work, AFAIK, so
> if you want to make a package afterwards, you'll appreciate the
> dependencies not being cleaned.

Sorry, I didn't state myself clear enough. What I want is:

Package A (,,main'' package): make install
Building dependencies...
Package B build as a dependency, installed, ,,work'' leaved on disk
Package C build as a dependency, installed, ,,work'' leaved on disk
Package D build as a dependency, installed, ,,work'' leaved on disk
[returning to build of package A].

Suppose I have a small drive and want to have ,,work'' directory cleaned
just after automatic installation of a dependency. What now?

,,make package'' needs that, you say. Well, AFAIK pkg_tarup, when run on
freshly installed package (eg. configuration files unmodified and such)
should give me the same results, shouldn't it?

> It's a matter of taste, I guess. I don't find 'make install clean
> clean-depends' either ugly or over necessary.

I want the package to be cleaned _right_ _after_ it was installed (as other
package's dependecy).

> > 2. Why the dependencies are checked _after_ the package has been
> > extracted?
> >    Wouldn't it be a bit better to first check if the dependencies are
> >    available, if not - build them first, then clean them, then extract
> >    the,,main'' package and return to it's build?
> 
> I really think this is already the case. For example, when the DISTFILE is
> zipped, unzip is added as a build dependency and of course checked and
> built *before* extraction, as others.

That makes sense for unzip, but why - for example - mozilla sources should be
extracted, taking up diskspace, doing _nothing_, when it's dependencies are
compiled? Couldn't we wait with this extract until the dependencies are
satisfied, and then extract & compile mozilla?

> > 4. I found pkg_tarup very useful. Do you? Do you think, that further
> [...]
> >    Do you think, that adding such options to pkg_tarup would be useful,
> >    or would it be a waste of time (just because pkgsrc can do such
> >    things) ?   Don't forget, that pkg_tarup can save a lot of time, when
> 
> Fully agreed. Send patches :)

Thanks for your opinion, I'll see what I can do.

Regards,
-- 
Micha³ Pasternak :: http://pasternak.w.lub.pl
I just discovered Marshall, Kirk and McKusick are really a single person!