From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Mar 26 10:29: 9 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mail.hiwaay.net (fly.hiwaay.net [208.147.154.56]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D42137B405; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 10:29:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from bsd.havk.org (user-24-214-88-13.knology.net [24.214.88.13]) by mail.hiwaay.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2QIT0Yd239542; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 12:29:00 -0600 (CST) Received: by bsd.havk.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C30261A786; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 12:28:57 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 12:28:57 -0600 From: Steve Price To: Maxim Sobolev Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [Proposal] Moving utility targets out of bsd.port.mk Message-ID: <20020326182857.GJ59834@bsd.havk.org> References: <3CA0990E.25246AFD@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CA0990E.25246AFD@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.5-PRERELEASE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 05:51:42PM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > Earlier today when walking through PRs assigned to a portmgr@ I've > noticed that there is a quite large class of PRs proposing a new > utility targets for bsd.port.mk ("utility targets" here are targets > not used during ordinary `make package clean' process, such as > makesum, fetch-recursive etc.). Since those targets provided for > user's/developer's convinience only and don't affect > package-generation facility (bento cluster) or Joe Ordinary User, it > would be nice if we allow to ports committers to modify/extend them > without explicit portmgr@ approval. > > My proposal is to move out those targets into another file (say > ) and allow ports committers to play with it freely > using ordinary peer-review process. This will solve several problems > at once: [snip] This is an interesting proposal. Along the same lines as the speedups you recently committed to bsd.port.mk if these optional bits had a knob whereby inclusion of them could be turned off in the Joe Ordinary User case it should make for moderate at least speedups by not having to read and parse a bunch of information that isn't used. I'm not sure how much it would violate POLA to default to not including these bits put it is definitely (IMHO) something worth exploring. -steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message