From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Jan 6 13: 3: 1 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from heaven.gigo.com (gigo.com [207.173.11.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D7EC37B404 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 13:02:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ppp100-bsace7023.telebrasilia.net.br (ppp100-bsace7023.telebrasilia.net.br [200.163.6.100]) by heaven.gigo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAE43B8D4 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 13:02:49 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 43879 invoked by uid 1001); 6 Jan 2002 21:02:25 -0000 Delivered-To: lioux@localhost Received: (qmail 43728 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2002 20:28:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (unknown) by unknown with SMTP; 6 Jan 2002 20:28:02 -0000 Received: from pop.brturbo.com by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.9.6) for lioux@localhost (single-drop); Sun, 06 Jan 2002 18:27:40 -0201 (BRST) Received: from smtp2.brturbo.com Received: from aldan.algebra.com (aldan.algebra.com [216.254.65.224]) by smtp.brturbo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C2713AD04 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 18:20:57 -0200 (BRST) Received: from aldan.algebra.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aldan.algebra.com (8.11.6/8.11.5) with ESMTP id g06KHal44276 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2002 15:17:41 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mi@aldan.algebra.com) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 15:17:33 -0500 (EST) From: Mikhail Teterin Subject: special ports -- separate category (Re: cvs commit: ports/www...) To: lioux@brturbo.com In-Reply-To: <20020106175324.42629.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 >> we have it all under one port with a dialog based configure to ask >> which language should be used? Defaulting to $LANG, for example... > Humm, I agree in principle with you but since one of FreeBSD's > selling points is our packaging system (which does not handle multiple > packages being build from a single port), we have to stick with > multiple incarnations of these ports. I'd like to correct this by saying, that our _ports_ system is the main selling points, IMO. Not the _packaging_ system -- which everybody has. > This is really suboptimal and prettu scary as you pointed out. > However, this will have to do for now. As soon as we get another > option, we can go and remove all these crazy multiports we have laying > around the Ports' Tree. Let me try to propose something more constructive, before I'm in everybody's kill.file. The data and the logic needed for the possible options needs to be stored somewhere, and it may as well be represented in the form of a port. On the other hand, publishing all this "crazy multiports" as part of the usual ports collection is rather ugly -- by everybody's opinion. So, how about we introduce a separate (sub-)tree: /usr/ports/Bento (or some such)? We don't need to tar it into ports.tar.gz (we should not do this to Tools, either, BTW)? All of those crazy multiports can be shoved (repo-copied) there and be worked on by those who care (including Bento itself), but not annoy those, who don't? -mi P.S. You responded to me personally, but please, resend this to -ports, if you don't object. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message