Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 15:29:41 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: Grzegorz Junka <list1@gjunka.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dependency explosions Message-ID: <57F25D45.5000004@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <19d248ae-8919-fdc9-84e8-ff90ae761e6f@gjunka.com> References: <2df71272-7b98-ad73-650a-3ec70beb71d5@freebsd.org> <d14d1aaf-5bdb-2e09-2892-2e32c4db0810@FreeBSD.org> <19d248ae-8919-fdc9-84e8-ff90ae761e6f@gjunka.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Grzegorz Junka wrote on 10/03/2016 15:11: > > On 03/10/2016 12:14, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >> Le 01/10/2016 à 04:35, Julian Elischer a écrit : >>> There is a need for a "minimum" install of a lot of packages. >> Some dependencies are often optional, and can be unchecked by running >> make config. >> >>> Such a 'minimum' install should probably be the default when coming in >>> as a dependency, as >>> there is an increasing tendency to configure things with all the bells >>> and whistles. >> The bare minimum will never be the default. The default is what will >> fit most people, so that they can use our packages out of the box. >> > > Shouldn't all packages default to noX dependencies? If I am not mistaken > FreeBSD is predominantly a server-side system, with X running only > occasionally (I am running X but I compile all packages with poudriere). I agree. Many ports have X and -nox11 (like ImageMagick-nox11 or open-vm-tools-nox11) but there are still some without nox11 variant. But X11 is not the only one dependency problem. I think that dependency changes should be better tracked and examined before commit changes to ports tree. Miroslav Lachman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?57F25D45.5000004>