DragonFly BSD
DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2003-10
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Xml in packaging system

From: David Leimbach <leimy2k@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:41:04 -0600

This is very cool... At first glance it looks like
"press record"
build the package.
"stop recording"

Now you have a set of port rules?

Am I way off?

If not I really like it :). How would this differ from expect?

I think I missed something.

On Oct 31, 2003, at 12:25 PM, Matthew Dillon wrote:

What I envision in a packaging system is something that makes the port maintainer's life as easy as possible.

    Lets say you are developing a new port, libabcd, which depends on a
    number of other libraries which are also ports in the system.

As a developer I want to be able to do something like this:

% vfsenvironment empty 'csh'

(Now you would be in a vfs-sandboxed shell. You can map-in other ports
which you have already installed on the system):

    % vfsrecord "build_depend"
    ok, recording mappings as 'build_depend'
    % vfsmap libgettextsrc:0.12.11
    % vfsmap libexpat		(map in the highest installed version)
    % vfsmap libc
    % vfsmap gmake
    % vfsrename /usr/local/bin/gmake /usr/local/bin/make

Once you have built an environment you could then attempt to build
your new port natively simply by running the port's native build
(at least initially). If things are missing you can vfsunmap and vfsmap
additional required elements.

Modifications to the port distribution itself could also be done through
the VFS. In this case the VFS would be acting like a unionfs in that it
would record whiteouts (deletions) and copy files that are modified into
a higher layer which would be stored in the VFS environment process's
memory (sufficient as long as no more then 2G worth of changes are made).

% vfsunion ~dillon/original_distribution work

(make your modifications to the work. edit files, rm files, rename,

When you are satisfied that the build is working you can save the vfs
state, which will also 'diff' any modifications you have made and record
file/directory deletions. The output file would be human readable and
human editable (though it's easier for the developer to just enter the
vfs environment and make modifications within the environment)

    % vfsrecord -w
    all changes recorded in 'build_depend.vfs'
    % exit


    Ok.  So there you have it, you now have the VFS environment and the
    patches required to build your new port!

Similar action would be taken for install and run-time dependancies.
Run-time dependancies would be more restrictive since under normal
conditions you might not want to have to run every port wrapped in a
VFS. e.g. simple ports like when you run 'less'. But more involved
ports, like OpenOffice, might always run in some sort of VFS environment.

Note that the VFS environment I am contemplating does not take over
the entire filesystem space. That is, in the above example, the mainstream
directories /usr/local/lib and /usr/local/bin would be selectively enabled
and/or modified within the VFS but other directories, like your home
directory for example (really all other directories not involved with
mapping operations) would simply be passed through. You would have to
explicitly tell the VFS to map something as a union in order for the VFS
to record your modifications within that target.

In anycase, that is my idea... to approach it from the port maintainer's
point of view rather then from a technical standpoint.

					Matthew Dillon

[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]