You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#1 2006-03-07 10:29:25
- gradgrind
- Member
- From: Germany
- Registered: 2005-10-06
- Posts: 921
Include PKGBUILD etc. in actual packages?
I'm sure this must have been asked or requested before, but couldn't find any trace of it, so here goes:
Would it not be helpful under various circumstances to have all the building stuff for a package (i.e. that which you would find in the abs directory) included (say, as .abs) in each package? This would make building your own repositories easier - no need to build an abs directory for them. It might help tweaking of old packages easier, when for some reason you can't use the latest build stuff. No problems syncing abs with your actual installed files ...
Are there good reasons for not doing this (apart from a minimal increase in package size)? To implement it should be very easy - just a tweak to makepkg.
larch: http://larch.berlios.de
Offline
#2 2006-03-07 18:17:32
- phrakture
- Arch Overlord
- From: behind you
- Registered: 2003-10-29
- Posts: 7,879
- Website
Re: Include PKGBUILD etc. in actual packages?
I see nothing beneficial that cannot be gleened from what abs gives you - PKGBUILDs are stored in CVS, so you can always view old packages.
The reason for not doing it is, obviously, the overcomplication. Also, it makes logical sense to have source and binary seperate - not much point to include build instructions in a package if they're never needed (i.e. a production server). It has nothing to do with size, it has to do with the fact that it's not needed.
Offline