From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 6 17:21:49 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB8DBD15 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 17:21:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from decke@bluelife.at) Received: from mail-oa0-x236.google.com (mail-oa0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6ADE62567 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 17:21:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id n5so5693738oag.27 for ; Sun, 06 Oct 2013 10:21:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bluelife.at; s=google; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kfmjupDKEmj/BGujfeQHM3FS9nW3NFQDsXVOuEH+G3k=; b=SL7hmMDMzvhchOFDUPtp8Jktga7vRa70ob70A7D7+N+jtpz9++wPR0yM1cH5H9bXmY b4tMxm8MiVHLnmQLXU/C7wskd7EDuwOjllPCT5MdfktOU0SiHgWHlYYCbS+lcTp8sh09 qO4H2JHg1RggRqmZx+I3HXYbRmdFYCWmFIf+M= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=kfmjupDKEmj/BGujfeQHM3FS9nW3NFQDsXVOuEH+G3k=; b=EoCI/cyv7vNgAmgjeIgzEoaEzvjX2JBCIJU4vHfEAuU+Y12j9gMlMMbGUP02SyHoIB uMHNk/4xcB5RwDhhFNTtrj2zo1F7uU+0RPnJMvwvQmdZOZyKYB6fHAPeS+DU7TF1aXiK hxa6a1PAt499nkT0o0eMK2jFuGsg62UwQNgmdwPe8grfoqs2LXaS/FpB6IS70Svl81IF +6J7cdjudGj9yt4xtVwGC7jvuhtI7wH4CzblS9jas5CJZreC8VNlc+/wS+mXgUc9nugx BHSjziQQ/JNy8wpnfIlHt4G+oUj7KW+N2/VBty83rhr5mEi1xbLkAuY450OnfvvA2U6k omdQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnG4Yd7aGqPGnBPzdX6buUHJ1UmUWIUuhAWHJbhbm6NeSLswRtci68JB4yM8V1SJqJURJn2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.60.5 with SMTP id d5mr41662635oer.0.1381080108709; Sun, 06 Oct 2013 10:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Sender: decke@bluelife.at Received: by 10.76.154.2 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 10:21:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [176.66.174.2] In-Reply-To: References: <20131003084814.GB99713@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <524D6059.2000700@FreeBSD.org> <524DD120.4000701@freebsd.org> <20131003203501.GA1371@medusa.sysfault.org> <20131004061833.GA1367@medusa.sysfault.org> <20131004063259.GC72453@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20131004065753.GV82824@droso.dk> <20131004070158.GE72453@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20131004111256.GC98118@admin.xzibition.com> Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 19:21:48 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: c831Q6PQWpVa9M6ygqV9aIjTaFo Message-ID: Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Staging, packaging and more From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bernhard_Fr=F6hlich?= To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ulrich_Sp=F6rlein?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "ports@freebsd.org Ports" , Baptiste Daroussin , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_Apestegu=EDa?= , Bryan Drewery X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2013 17:21:49 -0000 On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ulrich Sp=F6rlein wrote: > 2013/10/4 Bryan Drewery : >> On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 09:01:58AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 08:57:53AM +0200, Erwin Lansing wrote: >>> > On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 08:32:59AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Please no devel packages. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Seconded. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > What's wrong with devel packages? >>> > > > >>> > > > It complicates things for developers and custom software on >>> > > > FreeBSD. The typical situation that I see on most Linux platforms= is a >>> > > > lot of confusion by people, why their custom software XYZ does no= t >>> > > > properly build - the most common answer: they forgot to install a >>> > > > tremendous amount of dev packages, containing headers, build tool= s and >>> > > > whatnot. >>> > > > On FreeBSD, you can rely on the fact that if you installed e.g. l= ibGL, >>> > > > you can start building your own GL applications without the need = to >>> > > > install several libGL-dev, libX11-dev, ... packages first. >>> > > > This is something, which I personally see as a big plus of the Fr= eeBSD >>> > > > ports system and which makes FreeBSD attractive as a development = platform. >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > On the other ends, that makes the package fat for embedded systems,= that also >>> > > makes some arbitrary runtime conflicts between packages (because th= ey both >>> > > provide the same symlink on the .so, while we could live with 2 ver= sion at >>> > > runtime), that leads to tons of potential issue while building loca= lly, and >>> > > that makes having sometime insane issues with dependency tracking. = Why having >>> > > .a, .la, .h etc in production servers? It could greatly reduce PBI = size, etc. >>> > > >>> > > Personnaly I do have no strong opinion in one or another direction.= Should we be >>> > > nicer with developers? with end users? with embedded world? That is= the question >>> > > to face to decide if -devel packages is where we want to go or not. >>> > > >>> > >>> > If we chose to go down that path, at least we should chose a differen= t >>> > name as we've used the -devel suffix for many years for developmental >>> > versions. >>> > >>> > I must agree that it is one of the things high on my list of things t= hat >>> > irritate me with several Linux distributions but I can see the point = for >>> > for embedded systems as well. But can't we have both? Create three >>> > packages, a default full package and split packages of -bin, -lib, >>> > and even -doc. My first though twas to make the full package a >>> > meta-package that would install the split packages in the background, >>> > but that would probably be confusing for users at the end of the day,= so >>> > rather just have it be a real package. >>> > >>> I do like that idea very much, and it is easily doable with stage :) >> >> +1 to splitting packages for embedded usage. > > -1 for the split, as it will not fix anybody's problem. > > On regular machines, disk space is cheap and having to install more > packages is just annoying to users. Think of the time wasted that > people are told to apt-get libfoo-dev before they can build anything > from github, or similar. > > If you actually *are* space constricted on your tiny embedded machine, > what the fuck are you doing with the sqlite database and all the > metadata about ports/packages anyway? Just rm /usr/include and > /usr/share/doc, /usr/share/man, etc. when building your disk image. > But you are doing that already anyway, so this solves no actual > problem for you. > > My two cents > Uli I also don't see why we need to optimize our packages for an embedded environment that is usually very customized. Wouldn't it make more sense to provide some proper port / packaging options/flags that help to optimize size of the packages without touching header files? People could use that flags and poudriere to build their packages together with all their other compiler flags and cpu optimisations. --=20 Bernhard Froehlich http://www.bluelife.at/