From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 12:25:51 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4640B16A4CE for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 12:25:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.server.rpi.edu (smtp2.server.rpi.edu [128.113.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8D7F43D41 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 12:25:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by smtp2.server.rpi.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i4OJPnIX032326; Mon, 24 May 2004 15:25:49 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20040524183804.GA53827@prophecy.dyndns.org> References: <20040524183804.GA53827@prophecy.dyndns.org> Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 15:25:48 -0400 To: Christopher Nehren From: Garance A Drosihn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Third "RFC" on on pkg-data ideas for ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 19:25:51 -0000 At 2:38 PM -0400 5/24/04, Christopher Nehren wrote: >On Mon, May 24, 2004, Garance A Drosihn scribbled these curious markings: >> > > The third proposal is basically: >> a) move most "standard" files into a new pkg-data >> file, as described in previous proposals, except >> for pkg-descr and "patch" files. > >Yuck. I don't want to have to navigate a large file just to >see how to enable something or change something for a port, >or check its plist, etc. > >And, how do you suppose 'make' will work? This was covered in my earlier RFC's. My last round of ideas is written up at: http://people.freebsd.org/~gad/PkgData/ but I really need to update those pages to include all the things we've worked on since then. New ideas, etc. I really should have done that before posting this "round 3", but I promised Darren I would post *something* this weekend, and I didn't have the time to update those web pages. > > Thus, end-users could 'cvsup refuse' the patches for categories >> that they do not care about, and it would not break operations >> which work on the entire ports collection (such as `make index'). > >Not that I've tried this, but ... can't you just use a mask like >ports/graphics/*/files/ or such to refuse patch files? I have no idea. Try it. Let me know. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu