pkg_add doesn't keep dependent pkgs

[Garrett Cooper]

Garrett Cooper wrote:
> Maslan wrote:
>> That would be great.
>> I'll wait for the patch
>>
>>
>> On Nov 6, 2007 1:01 PM, Garrett Cooper <youshi10 at u.washington.edu> 
>> wrote:
>>  
>>> Maslan wrote:
>>>    
>>>>>     Package dependencies may change, depending on the user 
>>>>> settings and
>>>>> port maintainers configuration for the port (i.e. Makefiles). The 
>>>>> same
>>>>> sort of applies to packages as well.
>>>>>     Or were you referring to just packages instead of ports based
>>>>> package metadata :)?
>>>>>     Or maybe a better question is: what are you trying to accomplish?
>>>>> -Garrett
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>> The problem is that i always try FreeBSD snapshots, and each time i
>>>> did a fresh install, i found my self in need to install xorg & gnome.
>>>> so when i use pkg_add -rK xorg or pkg_add -rK gnome, it just keeps the
>>>> package itself only without its dependencies, it would be better for
>>>> me to keep the packages i use rather than downloading them every time.
>>>>
>>>> The ports has no problem with that, since it leaves all the port
>>>> dependencies in /usr/ports/distfiles but i prefer packages than
>>>> recompiling every time i install a fresh system something like gnome
>>>> would eat my day compiling it.
>>>>       
>>> Hmm... that is indeed silly.
>>>
>>> Let me see if I can fire up a patch for that little issue sometime
>>> either next week or the week after to fix that.
>>>
>>> -Garrett
>    That's assuming (IIRC) pkg_add doesn't invoke libfetch related APIs 
> directly and extract straight to the command line. It may take a bit 
> more work than I initially think, but a patch *should* be trivial to 
> create.
> -Garrett

    The URL provided to this really simple patch should fix the problem 
for -K not being propagated down child pkg_add processes 
(http://students.washington.edu/youshi10/posted/pkg_add_keep_flag_prop.patch). 
I would test it out but my FreeBSD box is still not hooked up to the 
net, so no dice :(. It's simple enough though that I'm almost 100% 
positive that it's correct. If the behavior's wrong or slightly askew, 
please let me know and I'll see if I can hack around the code a bit more.
    You made a good point though in terms of usage and propagating / 
whitelisting options from parent to child (master to slave?) copies of 
pkg_install apps. I'll write that up for my todo list for the 
pkg_install rewrite (VLSI's kicking my ass this quarter along with work, 
so I haven't had a real chance to sit down and make a plan for 
developing pkg_install).
Cheers,
-Garrett