Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 28 Aug 1996 19:10:24 -0700
From:      "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
To:        James FitzGibbon <james@ican.net>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Should this port go in ?
Message-ID:  <960828191024.ZM21365@time.cdrom.com>
In-Reply-To: James FitzGibbon <james@ican.net> "Re: Should this port go in ?" (Aug 28,  7:02pm)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.95.960828215547.27011A-101000@expresslane.ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm forced to agree with Chuck - I don't see where the dynamic PLIST behavior
makes sense in a port where no such dynamism is required, and anyone else
looking at this port is going to be left wondering just why it's so darn
complicated.  The dynamic PLIST file is still a reasonable idea, and one I'd
use if the port had a highly interactive install which selectively copied only
certain components of the port into place.  Then you could conceivably use one
port to generate several different packages, each with a slightly different
intended audience.  Just don't fall in love with the idea so much that you
start obfuscating ports unnecessarily - that's all I'm asking! :)

-- 
- Jordan Hubbard
  President, FreeBSD Project



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?960828191024.ZM21365>