Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 4 Oct 2013 08:32:59 +0200
From:      Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Fernando =?iso-8859-1?Q?Apestegu=EDa?= <fernando.apesteguia@gmail.com>, ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [HEADSUP] Staging, packaging and more
Message-ID:  <20131004063259.GC72453@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
In-Reply-To: <20131004061833.GA1367@medusa.sysfault.org>
References:  <20131003084814.GB99713@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <524D6059.2000700@FreeBSD.org> <524DD120.4000701@freebsd.org> <20131003203501.GA1371@medusa.sysfault.org> <CAGwOe2Ye2MLz3QpyMW3wyN9ew%2BiNnTETS1oOi_%2B8dPehUcWa0w@mail.gmail.com> <20131004061833.GA1367@medusa.sysfault.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--s9fJI615cBHmzTOP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 08:18:33AM +0200, Marcus von Appen wrote:
> On, Thu Oct 03, 2013, Fernando Apestegu=EDa wrote:
>=20
> > El 03/10/2013 22:41, "Marcus von Appen" <mva@freebsd.org> escribi=F3:
> > >
> > > On, Thu Oct 03, 2013, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 10/03/13 07:17, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > > > > on 03/10/2013 11:48 Baptiste Daroussin said the following:
> > > > >> This also allows lots of new features to come:
> > > > >> - Allow to create sub-packages
> > > > >> - Allow to create debuginfo packages.
> > > > > I'd like to mention a few other possibilities along the same line=
s:
> > > > > - doc packages
> > > > > - examples packages
> > > > > - "devel" packages (headers, tools and other files required for
> > compiling
> > > > > dependent software, but not generally needed for an end user)
> > > >
> > > > Please no devel packages.
> > >
> > > Seconded.
> >
> > What's wrong with devel packages?
>=20
> It complicates things for developers and custom software on
> FreeBSD. The typical situation that I see on most Linux platforms is a
> lot of confusion by people, why their custom software XYZ does not
> properly build - the most common answer: they forgot to install a
> tremendous amount of dev packages, containing headers, build tools and
> whatnot.
> On FreeBSD, you can rely on the fact that if you installed e.g. libGL,
> you can start building your own GL applications without the need to
> install several libGL-dev, libX11-dev, ... packages first.
> This is something, which I personally see as a big plus of the FreeBSD
> ports system and which makes FreeBSD attractive as a development platform.
>=20

On the other ends, that makes the package fat for embedded systems, that al=
so
makes some arbitrary runtime conflicts between packages (because they both
provide the same symlink on the .so, while we could live with 2 version at
runtime), that leads to tons of potential issue while building locally, and
that makes having sometime insane issues with dependency tracking. Why havi=
ng
=2Ea, .la, .h etc in production servers? It could greatly reduce PBI size, =
etc.

Personnaly I do have no strong opinion in one or another direction. Should =
we be
nicer with developers? with end users? with embedded world? That is the que=
stion
to face to decide if -devel packages is where we want to go or not.

regards,
Bapt

--s9fJI615cBHmzTOP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAlJOYRsACgkQ8kTtMUmk6Ex6WACeOA/7kBa3j2FjlmaMzAeuuYgX
TtIAnjkLLg7WZrT5mj6dAeSwreXlpEcV
=ZBam
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--s9fJI615cBHmzTOP--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131004063259.GC72453>