From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Tue Feb 9 11:45:54 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C13ABAA305D for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 11:45:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ran@pandora.amnic.net) Received: from pandora.amnic.net (pandora.amnic.net [IPv6:2001:67c:21c:a610::11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81C991C3E for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 11:45:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ran@pandora.amnic.net) Received: from ran by pandora.amnic.net with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1aT6jw-000MGn-1T; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 15:45:52 +0400 Subject: Re: Removing documentation In-Reply-To: <56B9C862.2000105@marino.st> To: John Marino Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 15:45:52 +0400 (AMT) Sender: ran@pandora.amnic.net From: Hrant Dadivanyan CC: Hrant Dadivanyan , FreeBSD Mailing List X-PGP: https://amnic.net/pgpkeys/hrant.asc X-NCC-RegID: am.isoc X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL127 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-Id: X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 11:45:54 -0000 > On 2/9/2016 11:52 AM, Hrant Dadivanyan wrote: > > It's fine that there is such an excellent tool as synth, but in server > > environment, when only a few ports are installed, having a management port > > with 17 dependencies is not reasonable. > > Rather that parroting this phrase, I would like to see some technical > reasoning about this dependency criticism. Would you be willing to > provide that? > > What I would like to see you address is: > > 1) As was just stated earler this morning, having synth installed is 2 > packages: Synth itself and ncurses. These "17 dependences" are build > requirements and not installed. So what is "unreasonable" about that? > So will require any upgrade of synth by itself, correct ? If build from sources, of course. > 2) If 17 dependencies are such a concern, why would you not install it > via official freebsd packages? > Ports buiding is also official. Phrasing of your question sets the preference in favour of prebuilt packages, my preference is opposite. > 3) If there is a corporate policy to build everything from source, what > would be the issue to use an officially packaged Synth to build Synth > (along with the other packages) so that the locally built Synth could > replace the downloaded version? > In my case it's just a preference to build everything locally. > As established earlier both by text and the recently posted architecture > drawing, Synth is not in the critical path and removing it has no > adverse affects on a system so the whole, "I'll be left in a bad state > argument has been debunked" > > This is not a rhetorical set of questions, I would very much like to see > how you answer these, given your opinion on this is unreasonable. I > would like to understand how this is a problem and why there are no ways > to address it. > There is no need to address it, because of two quite different use cases. As far as I can see synth is excellent in some cases, my point is that portmaster is fine in some other ones. > thank you, > John -- Hrant Dadivanyan (aka Ran d'Adi) hrant(at)dadivanyan.net /* "Feci quod potui, faciant meliora potentes." */ ran(at)psg.com