From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 2 19:35:29 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D849E16A401; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 19:35:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rizzo@icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94D0913C494; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 19:35:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rizzo@icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.11/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l12JZR3q099051; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 11:35:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.11/8.12.3/Submit) id l12JZRjU099050; Fri, 2 Feb 2007 11:35:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 11:35:27 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Pav Lucistnik Message-ID: <20070202113527.A98938@xorpc.icir.org> References: <200702021808.l12I8KBY073193@repoman.freebsd.org> <1170440345.33849.0.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> <20070202103221.C97555@xorpc.icir.org> <1170441475.33849.7.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <1170441475.33849.7.camel@ikaros.oook.cz>; from pav@FreeBSD.org on Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 07:37:55PM +0100 Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Luigi Rizzo , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/linux-kmod-compat Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:35:30 -0000 On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 07:37:55PM +0100, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > Luigi Rizzo píse v pá 02. 02. 2007 v 10:32 -0800: > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 07:19:05PM +0100, Pav Lucistnik wrote: ... > > > You can't do this. Now, the packages will contain nothing (read: be > > > useless). > > > > at least for the time being it makes no sense to have a > > package built for this port, for a variety of reasons > > (code stability, licensing, etc). So i have put in pkg-descr > > only enough info to cleanup on deinstall. > > I am not sure it will _ever_ make sense to have this as a package, > > when the code becomes stable enough it should should probably > > become part of the kernel. > > > > did i misunderstand something ? > > Yes. > > First, you break the Good Practices of port making. > > Second, you deny your users a part of the general functionality of the > ports collection - ie. packages. Users will be unable to install binary As i wrote, the developer of the code being ported (which happens to be me) has stated a few reasons why at this time he does not want a package made of this port. This is entirely his right, and we have the NO_PACKAGE keyword exactly for this reasons. > package from the network, users will be unable to build a package on > their machines and mass-install it on their other computers. You have no > rollback on upgrade, if it should fail. > > Plus, you're setting a false impression that other people can get away > with this in their ports. > > Now there are methods to have the pkg-plist autogenerated. How hard it > would be? As for auto-building the pkg-plist, it is not totally automated, at least judging from Sec. 7.5 of the handbook, and now i really don't have more time to spend on this exercise. When the code being ported will be in a more stable state, as i said in the commit message, i will reconsider this option, but generating the pkg-plist from the port's Makefile, because this is the only thing that makes sense in this specific port (because just checking that no files are overwritten by others does not help - if someone stuffs in extra headers in the directory i installed, it may screw up what the compiler picks up on an #include) cheers luigi