Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 21:59:24 -0500 From: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu>, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Ports Options Paper Message-ID: <20000908215924.G632@radon.gryphonsoft.com> In-Reply-To: <vqcits6704b.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; from asami@FreeBSD.org on Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 07:47:00PM -0700 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009081819050.78526-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> <vqcwvgm72mi.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000908211201.C632@radon.gryphonsoft.com> <vqcits6704b.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 07:47:00PM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > What are you trying to say? Well, I'm having trouble with the fact that if NetBSD has a good system, and we were to go and write our own, it would be NIH. But then, there's the time that'd be required to check out NetBSD's system and adjust it for our own system. I guess I think it'd be more fun to write one from scratch... :-P > * Except that you can change the target on the command line, and it won't > * make a difference which directory you're in. The solution for clashing > > You can do pretty much the same thing with the current system too. If > you want to move more stuff into master ports (such as extra pkg > files, etc.) and leave only the Makefile in the slave ports, that will > be exactly like what you say here. People can go to the master and > select the option or use one of the slaves which have some options > pre-selected for them. Yeah, that's true. But I don't like inode bloat, and I'd like to reduce it as much as possible. The fewer inodes (esp. directories), the faster ports install... and the more centralized it is.. > What does CVS have to do with it? I think that was a byproduct of billf's recent tirade against andreas. > At any rate, I actually happen to like the fact that currently, a port > can say "I depend on X libraries" by setting a dependency on > XFree86-4-libraries. (Ok, so it is really buried in USE_* stuff, but > that's not the point.) This leaves nothing unambiguous and makes > ports easy to understand/write/maintain. I don't see anything wrong > with that. The problem is that that whole system is proprietary to X4 libs. -- Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> <will@FreeBSD.org> GCS/E/S @d- s+:+ a--- C++ UB++++$ P+ L- E--- W+ N-- !o ?K w--- O- M+ V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X+ R+ tv+ b++ DI+++ D+ G++ e>++++ h! r- y? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000908215924.G632>