Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:49:22 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] UNIQUENAME patches Message-ID: <4FDCAB02.2040701@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20120616145341.GK98264@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <4FD8AFEC.6070605@FreeBSD.org> <CADLo83-Pr5Qqa6oUFKmfbLuuDOCiDQoiLVvjPfvJ1fT8ou0h9g@mail.gmail.com> <4FDC9488.2010509@FreeBSD.org> <20120616145341.GK98264@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigCC8E9902A77F2F6AF6C729A7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 16/06/2012 15:53, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> What could be added is a UNIQUENAMESUFFIX to be able to have a finer gr=
ain name.
That's certainly possible, but I was thinking about your plans to create
sub-packages. As I understand it, you'll be building and installing
each port into a staging area, and then creating a number of different
packages from what's in the staging area.
So for a port foo, you might create:
foo-0.99 --- the foo application and libfoo.so.0 shared
library
foo-docs-0.99 --- documentation
foo-examples-0.99 --- example configurations etc.
foo-devlibs-0.99 --- *.h headers, libfoo.a static lib, profiling
libs and other things useful for developers.
and so forth. So these are distinct packages all from one port with its
own UNIQUENAME and hence all using that port's OPTIONS settings, and all
built in one block.
Having UNIQUENAMESUFFIX for docs, examples, devlibs etc. would imply all
of those are entirely separate ports, like the way bacula and
bacula-docs are handled at the moment.
I can see there will need to be some sort of SUBPACKAGESUFFIXES variable
and associated gubbins in the ports makefiles, to do that,
plus something like tagging the entries in pkg-plist to identify which
sub-package they should belong to.
Trying to mix that with UNIQUENAMESUFFIXes would get pretty complicated.
Not to mention the question of foo-devel -- is that the devel
sub-package of the foo port, or a separate foo-devel port?[*]
Cheers,
Matthew
[*] Hmmm... maybe sub-packages suffixes should use a different
separator: foo-0.99, foo--docs-0.99, foo--examples-0.99
foo--devlibs-0.99 (?)
--=20
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey
--------------enigCC8E9902A77F2F6AF6C729A7
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk/cqwkACgkQ8Mjk52CukIzNGwCcDDDTwhbMzFxxK2gxOdEQkQKv
JJEAnRG7IEQ4aNTkoQEYwhZGO5ss8LgE
=1LF/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enigCC8E9902A77F2F6AF6C729A7--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FDCAB02.2040701>