From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon Oct 3 14:57:23 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8DC1AF3B4B for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 14:57:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mazhe@alkumuna.eu) Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5050BE83 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 14:57:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mazhe@alkumuna.eu) Received: from yggdrasil.alkumuna.eu (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e35:8a74:6e70:232:36ff:fe5c:3a87]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FB8BB004D5; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 16:57:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from freedom.alkumuna.eu ([IPv6:2a01:e35:8a74:6e70:62a4:4cff:fe54:b212]) (authenticated bits=0) by yggdrasil.alkumuna.eu (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u93Ev5NA054339 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 3 Oct 2016 16:57:08 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mazhe@alkumuna.eu) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 16:57:05 +0200 From: Matthieu Volat To: Grzegorz Junka Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dependency explosions Message-ID: <20161003165705.0e2e5e5a@freedom.alkumuna.eu> In-Reply-To: <6d1eb20d-4597-8176-3dbd-661648a6a03c@gjunka.com> References: <2df71272-7b98-ad73-650a-3ec70beb71d5@freebsd.org> <19d248ae-8919-fdc9-84e8-ff90ae761e6f@gjunka.com> <20161003151148.4860ca1a@curlew.lan> <6d1eb20d-4597-8176-3dbd-661648a6a03c@gjunka.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.0 (GTK+ 2.24.29; amd64-portbld-freebsd11.0) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/8hfOz_ZLwDB12d2C5jY/CtY"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alkumuna.eu; s=dkim; t=1475506629; bh=BqdUtpKZbeUVQM+XJbn4uKL0HNZOOkE3qJ/sDPWaYEY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cTsnqiGfmiaM/VFRpWmxPQCVYZa6frRNYsF2XvVtyJh7is5xWWban1ILfH1XZNHp6Za/a9EEC3vpuq6iKHCk/eBBVR+t40KkA4ka6EXSbD8KyXG+0ZFtt05kYw6m8NvKmD/wxfi7brXUL/FLyHenDt8KWsY9Hd18aWfcHftUMfY= X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 14:57:23 -0000 --Sig_/8hfOz_ZLwDB12d2C5jY/CtY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 14:29:27 +0000 Grzegorz Junka wrote: > On 03/10/2016 14:11, Mike Clarke wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 13:11:43 +0000 > > Grzegorz Junka wrote: > > > >> Shouldn't all packages default to noX dependencies? If I am not mistak= en > >> FreeBSD is predominantly a server-side system, with X running only > >> occasionally > > I'd disagree with that. I don't know whether or not the majority of > > FreeBSD installations are servers or personal computers but the chances > > are that the majority of server installations will have relatively few > > packages installed whereas most PC's are likely to make use of far > > more packages and are also likely to be using X. Building from ports > > to get the required options would be a much bigger task for these > > installations than it would be for the servers. > > >=20 > I have been wondering if it would be possible to have two distinct set=20 > of packages compiled automatically, one tailored for X and one for the=20 > console. It seems that requirements of both environment are quite=20 > opposite. The server-side requires small amount of packages without X=20 > because it wants to run the system headless, as long as possible and=20 > without interruptions and restarts. Whereas the X/PC environment always=20 > wants to have everything latest and newest. In the Linux world they=20 > would just create a new distribution, even in the BSD world there is=20 > PC-BSD/TrueOS. But we have ports and can re-use the same base for two=20 > distinctive set of packages. I don't believe we can create pre-compiled=20 > packages for FreeBSD in such a way, that both camps are happy (which=20 > this thread is one of many signs of). >=20 > Grzegorz That must be somehow possible and even extensible to be something like macp= orts variants, except with binary package support (macports localy build pa= ckages when user defined option differs from default); but this would take = signifiant space and processing power... On the other hand, setting OPTIONS_UNSET to include X11 is quite trivial. I= would expect a server administrator to be more proficient in that kind of = settings... PS. I agree with the multiplication of dependencies, but I see them as the = result of nowaday FOSS ecosystem practices rather than port management issu= es. --=20 Matthieu Volat --Sig_/8hfOz_ZLwDB12d2C5jY/CtY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlfyccEACgkQ+ENDeYKZi34rIgCfcZlLlZm7dcCoDMJDwoGY80Z/ UC4AoKSE0eanOTz7IYbSc0J4BO63E/fh =WKfu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/8hfOz_ZLwDB12d2C5jY/CtY--