Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:32:03 -0500 From: "Conrad J. Sabatier" <conrads@cox.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports with no pkg-plist files Message-ID: <20041016143203.7d20298a@dolphin.local.net> In-Reply-To: <20041016141935.2d77ebea@dolphin.local.net> References: <20041016135618.00711a35@dolphin.local.net> <20041016210145.674cbade.lehmann@ans-netz.de> <20041016141935.2d77ebea@dolphin.local.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:19:35 -0500, "Conrad J. Sabatier" <conrads@cox.net> wrote: > > OK, I'm a little out-of-date re: this stuff. :-) > > However, doing a subsequent scan of Makefiles turned up a large number > of them that don't define any PLIST* variables. > > In other words, the ports tree is rather inconsistent in this area, it > seems. The majority of ports still do have pkg-plist files, some have > PLIST* variables defined, some don't. > > I don't know what would be the preferred resolution to all of this, > but it *is* a little disturbing, don't you think? Just as a footnote: I personally would prefer to keep the pkg-plist files around. They greatly simplify the task of determining what files are provided by an uninstalled port (I use a script I wrote that takes advantage of these files for just this purpose, in fact). I don't want to re-open any old discussions here, just tossing out my $.02 worth. -- Conrad J. Sabatier <conrads@cox.net> -- "In Unix veritas"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041016143203.7d20298a>