Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2000 11:15:04 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Message-ID: <20000212111504.N5570@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <00021212385600.02144@localhost.localdomain>; from rkw@dataplex.net on Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 12:19:01PM -0600 References: <20000209215806.M99353@abc.123.org> <20000209210106.A14617@moe.htfdw1.ct.home.com> <00021212385600.02144@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
**** TAKE THIS TO PORTS@FREEBSD.ORG *****
This is NOT a -current issue!! And the people that can actually effect
change hang out on ports@freebsd.org, not necessarly on
current@freebsd.org
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 12:19:01PM -0600, Richard Wackerbarth wrote:
> This is the direction that my thinking is headed. Let the actual developers
> keep things (pretty much) as is. Repackage the distribution into a multi-level
> hierarchy.
*IF* people were to take this to ports@freebsd.org, they would have
learned there was a discussion about a month ago in which the conclusion
was to use one dir per port, but remove the subdirs w/in each ports
subdir.
Thus rather than
foo/Makefile
foo/files/md5
foo/pkg/PLIST
foo/pkg/DESCR
foo/pkg/COMMENT
foo/patch/patch-aa
foo/patch/patch-ab
we would have
foo/Makefile
foo/md5
foo/pkg_PLIST
foo/pkg_DESCR
foo/pkg_COMMENT
foo/patch-aa
foo/patch-ab
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000212111504.N5570>