Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 09:21:39 -0500 From: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> To: FreeBSD Ports <ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: CVSROOT modules Message-ID: <20010104092138.B86630@argon.firepipe.net> In-Reply-To: <20010104131818.B22836@heechee.tobez.org>; from tobez@tobez.org on Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:18:18PM %2B0100 References: <20010104122344.A22836@heechee.tobez.org> <89743.978608277@axl.fw.uunet.co.za> <20010104131818.B22836@heechee.tobez.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:18:18PM +0100, Anton Berezin wrote: [.. arguments about CPAN vs ports ..] > Then these particular ports/packages have broken plist. [..] People are not forced to use either ports or CPAN.pm. Some folks like only needing one particular package database.. why complicate things by having to remember more than one set of commands to manage a pkg db? I do not intend to port everything from CPAN -- just the things people are most likely to use. Stuff like File::Cat (yes, really), and games perl modules do not serve much of a purpose in the ports tree. Stuff that can be used for building blocks do. <RANT TYPE="vision"> The argument I hear about PLISTs being wrong is slightly true. The PLISTs I generated are based on a logic that if more then one module shares a directory, none of the modules can delete it themselves. This avoids having to remember which directories need to be @unexec rm -rf'd. The proper way to handle directories like this (as with GNOME/KDE and other behemoths with large numbers of things that share many different directories) is to use multiple mtree files. Currently there is a patch (that I wrote some months ago) out that just needs testing and a couple mtree files to go with it before it enters the main ports system. In the end, I foresee having Mk/bsd.*.mk for major common portions (e.g. gtk, gnome, kde, perl, qt, tcl, tk, emacs, ad infinitum), as well as Mtree/bsd.*.mtree files for ports that share multiple directories among multiple ports. Since they are specific to the ports tree, they should actually NOT be managed in the same place as /etc/mtree/bsd.*.mtree. So screw empty directories.. inodes are aplenty, files are what matter. I'm not going to do it the GNOME way and make things depend on each other just so that directories get deleted when they're supposed to be. It's just like the argument not to let your version control system get in the way of progress. </RANT> -- wca To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010104092138.B86630>