From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 21 20:33:33 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE49416A4CE for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:33:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from lakermmtao11.cox.net (lakermmtao11.cox.net [68.230.240.28]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2254D43D2F for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:33:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mezz7@cox.net) Received: from mezz.mezzweb.com ([68.103.32.140]) by lakermmtao11.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-117-20041022) with ESMTP id <20050121203332.VSAI1657.lakermmtao11.cox.net@mezz.mezzweb.com>; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:33:32 -0500 Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:34:13 -0600 To: "Alexander Leidinger" References: <20050121205202.4092fc5a@Magellan.Leidinger.net> From: "Jeremy Messenger" Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20050121205202.4092fc5a@Magellan.Leidinger.net> User-Agent: Opera M2/7.54u1 (Linux, build 892) cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why does everybody switch to dynamic plists? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:33:33 -0000 On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:52:02 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Hi, > > can someone please tell me why people enjoy to use dynamic plists, even > when there was a static plist already? > > With a dynamic plist: > - We lose the ability to search for files which aren't installed. > (useful for users) > - We lose the ability to determine if a particular port contains what > we search. > (useful for users) > - We lose the ability to check just with grep if two ports install > conflicting files (in case we get a report of a conflict it's very > nice to not need to install a port to verify the conflict). > (useful for users and port developers) > - We lose the ability to use portlint to check the plist (if the > maintainer checks the generated one he just can use a static plist). > BTW.: Does portlint know how to check the embedded plist (the > Makefile variables)? > (useful for port developers) > - We lose the ability to maybe answer support requests without the need > to install the software. > (useful for "the frontliners") This is mofo annoy to me. I depend on plist pretty a lot to search what file they have and etc, so I can know for conflict, depend on this port and etc. google doesn't cut to me. > + We don't need to take care if the plist changes. > (useful for port developers) + smaller or no plist is good for modem connection user. > I count 1 positive and 5 negative aspects. > > If the developer of a port puts the dynamic plist generation into a > Makefile target instead of inlining it into the build/install process, > he doesn't needs to put alot more effort into the development process > (just one "make ") and gets the benefits of > static plists too. > > Maybe I've overlooked something, but so far I haven't seen a dynamic > plist which needs to be a dynamic one. So I think at least 99% of our > dynamic plists don't need to be dynamic. I, one, who is on your side. Two people wasn't happy with me when I refused to switch from static to dynamic in games/wesnoth. games/wesnoth is getting near 3k lines. ;-) > Bye, > Alexander. -- mezz7@cox.net - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org