Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:39:12 +0200 From: Jens Schweikhardt <schweikh@schweikhardt.net> To: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> Cc: FreeBSD ports <FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: port names and personal freedom Message-ID: <20040613093912.GB1260@schweikhardt.net> In-Reply-To: <763723AC-BCA6-11D8-B633-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> References: <763723AC-BCA6-11D8-B633-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 12, 2004 at 09:26:53PM +0200, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: # Dear porters, # # I'm just trying to add some vulnerabilities to the list that have been # forgotten recently. In this process I had to discover that we have a # new trend to creative naming in the ports tree. We have funny names like # # www/apache13-modperl -> apache+mod_perl-1.3.31 # (LATEST_LINK=apache+mod_perl) # # mail/sendmail-ldap -> sendmail+tls+sasl2+ldap-8.12.11 # (LATEST_LINK=sendmail+tls+sasl2+ldap) # # net/samba3 (LATEST_LINK=samba-3) # # ... the list goes on. At the risk of starting another bikeshed about the # personal # freedom of maintainers to name their port how they please, why TF does # this have # to be? Do we have any benefit from that? Is `plus' as a package suffix # separator # en vouge this summer? Would adding a check in portlint help? Regards, Jens -- Jens Schweikhardt http://www.schweikhardt.net/ SIGSIG -- signature too long (core dumped)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040613093912.GB1260>