register a list of other packages with which they conflict (via the
-C option to pkg_create), and they will refuse to install (unless -f is
specified) if one of the listed packages is already present.
* Update documentation for the new feature as well as fleshing out some
existing documentation.
* Bump PKG_INSTALL_VERSION so this feature can be tested for.
Submitted by: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@ciam.ru>
PR: bin/47145
MFC after: 2 weeks
osreldate.
(Actually, due to differences in package compression formats, I'm
not sure that a -CURRENT pkg_add -r will do the right thing in
this case, once it finds them.)
$ cat pkg.tgz | pkg_add -
The above command line will fail on -CURRENT or -STABLE, and
therefore, so will sysinstall if you try to install additional
packages through the network (FTP) from a multiuser system. Because
of the different environment during installation (wrt the playpen),
this bug does not manifest itself during initial installs, and users
may install packages from the network just fine at that time.
This bug was fixed in OpenBSD 4 years ago.
----------------------------
revision 1.4
date: 1998/04/07 05:56:13; author: marc; state: Exp; lines: +13 -8
fix package input from standard input -- the program tried to process
stdin twice. Note: it assumes stdin is a compressed tar file.
----------------------------
PR: conf/36606
Obtained from: OpenBSD
MFC after: 2 weeks
allows for an easy way to backup old version of port prior to installing
a new one;
- silence compiler warnings by killing some unused variables and adding
all includes necessary.
MFC after: 2 weeks
Use '' quotes instead of `' to delimit names of files and packages in
warning and error messages, because it is easier to cut-n-paste name in
question that way (single click) without confusing the shell. And yes,
I know that it is less eye-candy...
MFC after: 1 month
When reading the code I had to stop, say "ok, what does *these*
modifications of strl*() do? Pull out grep. Oh, not in add/, maybe above
in ../lib/? Yep. So what do they do? Comments above them are misleading,
guess I'll have to read the code. Oh, they just test strl* against the
size and return the result of the test. Now I can continue to read the
code I was.
The uses of s_strl*() then test that result and errx()'s.
Lets think about the "optimized" code I am removing:
In general the compiler pushes the three args to strl* onto the stack and calls
s_strl*. s_strl* has to indirectly access 3 args from the stack. Then push
them on the stack a 2nd time for the real strl* call. s_strl* then pops the
return from strl* off the stack; or moves it from the register it was returned
in, to the register where tests can happen. s_strl* then pops the three
arguments to strl*. Perform the test, push the result of the test, or move it
from the result register to the return value register. The caller to s_strl*
now has to either pop the return value of s_strl* or move it from the return
value register to the test register. The caller then pops the three args to
s_strl* off the stack (the same args that s_strl* itself had to pop off after
the real call to strl*). The s_strl* caller then performs a simular test to
what has already been done, and conditionally jumps. By doing things this way, we've given the compiler optimizer less to work with.
Also, please don't forget the that call to s_strl* has possibly jumped to code
not in the cache due to being far away from the calling code, thus causing a
pipeline stall.
So where is the "optimization" from s_strl*?
It isn't code clarity.
It isn't code execution speed. It isn't code size either.
