[dev] Re: [musl] Re: [ANN] sabotage 2011-04-09, a musl+busybox based distribution

From: Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:45:34 +0200

Anselm R Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com> writes:

> On 12 April 2011 00:45, pancake <pancake_AT_youterm.com> wrote:
>> Slpm is probably much simpler than any ports system out there. It
>> still needs some love..But it works for my use cases.
>> I recommend you to take a look on it. :)
>> I already packaged musl, tcc and other stuff in slpm
> I don't see the point in a package _manager_ at all.
> What I do see is to have something like ports or build scripts that
> build/bootstrap the system and create binaries for future updating
> purposes (or security fixes). My personal choice/preference for this
> would be a ports system based on mk files -- some volunteers
> contributed early steps in this direction already.

That's how it works for sabotage so far:


will completely update the system (I guess I'll switch to a
dependency-based approach since I already have a fair share of packages).
The whole thing should be DESTDIR-ready, so you can install into a
chroot for testing or building file sets. Plain users simply unpack
these file sets into /.

> Ideally the system would be kept up to date using rsync or just git
> pull, that's what I intend with sta.li (once I have more extra time).

git pull works as well already. :)

Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen@gmail.com>  http://chneukirchen.org
Received on Tue Apr 12 2011 - 14:45:34 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Apr 12 2011 - 14:48:02 CEST