From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 24 22:30:40 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B12E1065677 for ; Wed, 24 Dec 2008 22:30:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nikola.lecic@anthesphoria.net) Received: from anthesphoria.net (anthesphoria.net [200.46.204.219]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CF1D8FC1A for ; Wed, 24 Dec 2008 22:30:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nikola.lecic@anthesphoria.net) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.4.1 anthesphoria.net mBOMUVEv068389 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=anthesphoria.net; s=phero; t=1230157836; bh=2cIIRafeLeOixJfdS7hH4ccw6/oacWqx/88ken4he Bw=; l=3328; h=X-Bogosity:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer:X-Face:X-Operating-System: X-OpenPGP-Fingerprint:X-OpenPGP-Preferred-Keyserver:Mime-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=KPOIcCSYJy7SgzU7caS9VDd/ EykLAKE+7w+cXKXj09LcbEqs7GNeSdKZx7XJiDtos87dlzNccJ8MvmdK2LuiP4FWNSd 8QBvnuEy4JaBzSL2X0o15r2adnRXAtYdn2dgE2+q2FuwyD2AmAHLq+YbpeOoB2UOwQ6 FOQVg9X1b2N6A= Received: from anthesphoria.net (adsl-200-199.eunet.yu [213.198.200.199]) (authenticated bits=0) by anthesphoria.net (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id mBOMUVEv068389 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 24 Dec 2008 23:30:34 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from nikola.lecic@anthesphoria.net) Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2008 23:26:07 +0100 From: Nikola =?UTF-8?B?TGXEjWnEhw==?= To: Romain =?UTF-8?B?VGFydGnDqHJl?= Message-ID: <20081224232607.43ea938a@anthesphoria.net> In-Reply-To: <20081224131012.GA8392@blogreen.org> References: <20081224131012.GA8392@blogreen.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.11; i386-portbld-freebsd7.1) X-Face: pbl6-.[$G'Fi(Ogs2xlXP-V6{3||$Y[LOYs&~GJoikj'cVjcFC[V7du;;0~6nO= [Vi2?uU1Pq~,=Adj@,T:|"`$AF~il]J.Nz#2pU',Y7.{B;m/?{#sO^Dvo$rnmY6] X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 7-STABLE X-OpenPGP-Fingerprint: FEF3 66AF C90E EDC3 D878 7CDC 956D F4AB A377 1C9B X-OpenPGP-Preferred-Keyserver: x-hkp://pgpkeys.pca.dfn.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: FreeBSD-wip-status@FreeBSD.org, FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: TeXLive X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2008 22:30:40 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hello Romain, Thank you for the interesting analysis and for renewing the discussion about TeXLive on FreeBSD. On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 14:10:12 +0100 Romain Tarti=C3=A8re wrote: [...]=20 > 1. TeXLive should be very modular >=20 > It is then possible to run a version of XeTeX more recent > then the one provided with TeXLive (i.e. compile TeXLive > --without-xetex and depend on a port print/xetex-devel). [...] > If we consider that ports are build from source, it important to know > that TeXLive provide a single tarball for all applications binaries > source code. All the rest (macros, fonts, etc.) is provided as a lot > of small tarball. As a consequence, I see #1 as =C2=AB Split the > applications =C2=BB, and #2, #3 and #4 as =C2=AB Split the rest =C2=BB. B= ut maybe > the question is more about =C2=AB Split both =C2=BB. >=20 > For now, I do not intend to make the port that install all binaries a > meta-port (so no #1). It is quite huge and complex, include modified > version of libraries that are statically linked to the binaries, ... > well, I don't want to spend time on this right now (maybe in the > future but unsure =E2=80=94 However, contributions are welcomed). (I am the one who wrote #1.) What do you exactly mean by making a meta-port for binaries? To make a port for every binary group provided in their source tree? Sounds interesting, although what I meant there was to use the internal TeXLive build options, such as --without-xetex, so it's basically as simple as any of WITH_* options used in thousands of existing ports. > 3. One port per Package, grouping related packages (e.g. foo, > foo.source and foo.doc) (/[0-9]{4}/ ports) + meta-port for > Collections (84 meta-ports) + meta-port for Scheme (10 meta-ports) > + high granularity; > + no conflict; > - many ports. The main thing with TeXLive is that they make releases once a year. My opinion is that if we just stick with their releases -- we don't need any fine-grained work because such year-long cemented code somehow contradicts the idea of FreeBSD's flexible ports. The idea is to provide porters a flexible TeXLive base that can be enriched with many TeX-related projects that are not included in current TeXLive distribution (new and updated LaTeX packages, new versions of TeX extensions, etc). Once an initial TeXLive ports structure is committed, I'd like to see many porters grabbing parts of their particular areas of interest (or creating -devel ports) in order to provide users with versions newer than those initially included. It seems to me that your your proposal #3 supports this approach. Best regards. - --=20 Nikola Le=C4=8Di=C4=87 =3D =D0=9D=D0=B8=D0=BA=D0=BE=D0=BB=D0=B0 =D0=9B=D0= =B5=D1=87=D0=B8=D1=9B fingerprint : FEF3 66AF C90E EDC3 D878 7CDC 956D F4AB A377 1C9B ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iJwEAQEDAAYFAklStwQACgkQ/MM/0rYIoZiFhQQApUO7pofWE19GskMfQ34GRWSQ f5+AKlGvf2JKcMpB9Z0eq3aksIhxYFESAMwoEdWd+g0Z4gkyE9NdA4RCGflASahM yaqnLsf8Ri2C0QcXbUdgufE49Yw1coGOkPT3TklB5NL2TVY+2PGJ/FfnxznU7pNY CdeiNOZicsIRXfyUV/Q=3D =3Dlp2b -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----