From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 8 19:34:52 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B4F616A468 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 19:34:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from mail.potentialtech.com (internet.potentialtech.com [66.167.251.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 489B613C448 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 19:34:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from vanquish.pgh.priv.collaborativefusion.com (pr40.pitbpa0.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.202]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.potentialtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55BCBEBC83; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 15:34:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 15:34:38 -0400 From: Bill Moran To: User Questions Message-Id: <20070608153438.e2b17bc9.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <20070608151456.6CC6.GERARD-SEIBERT@seibercom.net> References: <294439d20706081139l241ec4b6p83347ccb9d5847bc@mail.gmail.com> <20070608151456.6CC6.GERARD-SEIBERT@seibercom.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.3.1 (GTK+ 2.10.11; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: Re[2]: Increase in the number of ports: upgrade xorg to 7.2... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 19:34:52 -0000 In response to Gerard : > On June 08, 2007 at 02:57PM illoai@gmail.com wrote: > > > xorg is now 180-230 some-odd tiny packages (ports) > > instead of the old -clients, -server, -libraries blobs. > > > > It seems to work okay, and minor updates are far less > > strenuous. I give it five years to either prove itself or > > all the developers to go mad and sacrifice their firstborn > > in some wicked ritual to the sun-god. > > I am not totally convinced. If one small package is updated that is > depended on by 10 other package that in turn are depended on by a like > number of other packages, what has been really gained by breaking > everything into small bits? They may be easier to maintain; however > the impact on updating the system seems like it would be minimal. No. As long as the communication interface between modules (whether it be an API or something else) doesn't change, it's perfectly possible to update a single module without updating anything else. In practice, I've updated 5 or 6 little sub-ports of xorg 7 since I did the switch, and haven't had to rebuild all of xorg yet. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com