Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:06:46 +0000 From: John Birrell <jb@what-creek.com> To: "Aryeh M. Friedman" <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Limitations of Ports System Message-ID: <20071213210646.GA52285@what-creek.com> In-Reply-To: <47618F76.4080001@gmail.com> References: <475F7390.9090509@gmail.com> <1022BEDA-8641-4686-AB1A-3FE2D688F47F@FreeBSD.org> <475FAC1F.1010401@gmail.com> <19341C6C-BF3A-4DFD-B8DF-87F4E92B0335@FreeBSD.org> <0F330142-A3CA-4E6E-84BD-FDE55A8E3AEE@yahoo.com> <20071213111050.O6078@wonkity.com> <291C2604-2EDD-412E-9108-2ADD7D4D9F68@u.washington.edu> <47618F76.4080001@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 03:00:54PM -0500, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: > That is why I plan to use xorg as the test case for the new system.... > namely if it builds xorg in the most efficent way possible then it > will be considered good enough for release You need to pick a much more complicated set of dependencies than Xorg. You should analyse the dependency tree across all ports and then take into account what happens when source changes occur unsynchronised. Take things like those that depend on the various Qt ports. You will see that some depend on Qt3 and others on Qt4. Then consider things that depend on the documentation ports. Please do not fall into the trap of simplifying the requirements and then finding a simpler solution. -- John Birrell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071213210646.GA52285>