Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 20:23:53 +0000 (UTC) From: Vadim Goncharov <vadim_nuclight@mail.ru> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD problems and preliminary ways to solve Message-ID: <slrnj5l8uo.jd1.vadim_nuclight@kernblitz.nuclight.avtf.net> References: <slrnj4oiiq.21rg.vadim_nuclight@kernblitz.nuclight.avtf.net> <20110821110521.GA48820@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <j2u7e9$euj$2@dough.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Marcin Wisnicki! On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 18:33:45 +0000 (UTC); Marcin Wisnicki wrote about 'Re: FreeBSD problems and preliminary ways to solve': >>>1) No pkg and pkg-devel versions. The -devel version is headers, static >>> libs, programmer examples, etc. not needed in production (we could >>> say this part is what is actually depended on in B-deps). >> >> Xorg is partially broken up in this way. In general, it is up to the >> ports' maintainers to do this - the FreeBSD project just hosts the ports >> infrastructure, it's up to maintainers to supply and maintain the actual >> ports. Note that requiring both pkg and pkg-devel versions of ports >> significantly increases maintainer effort for little (to them) perceived >> value. Also, I find having separate pkg and pkg-devel versions a real >> PITA - I regularly find that information i need is missing from the pkg >> file and I have to dig out the missing files. >> >> Out of interest, what is the rationale behind this requirement. > I too find lack of -devel packages as one of freebsd strengths not > weaknesses. > Such separation is also very specific to certain languages like C/C++. > However to provide a middle-ground solution I once proposed installation > filters based on patterns, which would give ability to not have unwanted > files essentially for free (just small changes in pkg_* and ports/Mk). > For example there could be a standard filter group called "devel" that > includes "include/**" and "lib/**.a". That's simple, but won't work for all cases. For example, aforementioned example of glib and perl will nit be catched. Also, this exclusion is blind: it's better for maintainer to flag group of files as not needed. > Packages would have ability to exclude/include additional files to any > group if needed using pkg-plist directives. > Similar patterns could be defined for docs, localizations, etc. > User would set which groups of files he wants to exclude during > installation or after it. That's sounds more like OPTIONS and more likely will work. -- WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#166852181 mailto:vadim_nuclight@mail.ru [Anti-Greenpeace][Sober FreeBSD zealot][http://nuclight.livejournal.com]
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?slrnj5l8uo.jd1.vadim_nuclight>