Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 22:03:15 +0200 From: Gabor PALI <pgj@FreeBSD.org> To: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru> Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/archivers/hs-zip-archive Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/devel/hs-binary Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/devel/hs-darcs/files patch-Setup.lhs patch-darcs.cabal ports/devel/hs-darcs Makefile distinfo pkg-d Message-ID: <AANLkTikI-vhSbpIAgw2_bMT8oNNngkWk9BjqwZ_PG7G-@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20100526193943.GE25216@hades.panopticon> References: <AANLkTil2ds1NMcOVfF6_R3bCkIb1SPOnLMkagLWt90nk@mail.gmail.com> <20100524220501.GF7380@hades.panopticon> <AANLkTikBXrbZpHaLJN3eVA80RQfJHLOaBLFFK1CNbnh7@mail.gmail.com> <20100525031628.GB8034@FreeBSD.org> <20100526152458.GB25216@hades.panopticon> <AANLkTikVxxaDLgEhfblYdix5L0wz1NsRdMO8GC6N0HNi@mail.gmail.com> <20100526193943.GE25216@hades.panopticon>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru> wrote: > That is irrelevant to port naming. Understood. > If there are executable files, that's an application regardless of to > what audience it's targeted (plain users or developers). If there > are no executable files, that's a module or library. What if there is both? Even worse: what if the executable is just an option (see archivers/hs-zip-archive) or it can installed as a library or as an executable or both (textproc/(hs-)pandoc)? Most Haskell applications has their own libraries which might be used by another applications (see textproc/(hs-)pandoc). > users just know that py- are python modules, p5- are perl modules and > hs- are haskell modules. And applications are jsut applications whatever > they're written/packaged/distributed with. I see. > That guarantees nothing. > portupgrade -R ghc-* does. I think no. Sorry, I do not know portupgrade, so I have to branch my answer: - If -R use build dependency for tracking updates: GHC is not updated as frequently (ab. twice a year) as its dependent ports, so this seems like exploiting a side-effect of portupgrade. - If -R use run dependency for tracking updates: It will not update standalone Haskell applications, because theoretically they should not depend on GHC (practically they depend at the moment but without an exact reason), since GHC is effectively required at compile-time. > We've had these two audiences for years, along with many ports, many > languages and many prefixes, and it all worked well with established > rule of thumb for using or not using the prefix. Oh, good to know. Can you give me a pointer to this rule of thumb? > It's not a good idea to reinvent new rules and confuse users. They did not seem to be confused, I have not got any complaints so far. I do not want to reinvent anything, I just need some clarification here because I do not see it logical. Thank you for explaining me the well-established concepts. Cheers, :g
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikI-vhSbpIAgw2_bMT8oNNngkWk9BjqwZ_PG7G->