Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 21:09:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek <hoek@hwcn.org> To: Bruce Gingery <bruce@home.gtcs.com> Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ports@hub.freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/4304: Recommendation re. Ports Collection Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.970814204245.24264A-100000@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca> In-Reply-To: <199708142349.RAA28160@home.gtcs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 14 Aug 1997, Bruce Gingery wrote:
> bsd.ports.mk target additions (target / description)
>
> fetch-size-get (depends on fetch)
> creates a ${FILESDIR}/SIZES file equivalent to the md5 file
> with the size of each component.
>
> size-of-fetch
> reverse-grep ${FILESDIR}/SIZES excluding pseudos below
Hm. The other possibility would be to simply have authors note
in pkg/DESCR that X port has a large distfile.
Your short description doesn't take into account possible port
dependencies.
What I could see being useful is a recursive size-fetch which
determines the total size of all necessary downloads in order to
do a complete install. This is probably a bit more involved than
it sounds...
> make-size-get (depends on install)
> Well, if BUILD_SIZE is defined, merely uses it, else
> uses a ``just installed'' du -s ${WRKSRC} or ${WRKDIR}
> appends to ${FILESDIR}/SIZES with pseudo filename
> ``size-of-make''
Ugh. I wouldn't like to see this. The actual software's make
targets may create and delete temporary files during build.
Additionally, the build size may vary from machine to machine
where each has a different local (or system) configuration.
> install-size-get (depends on package)
> Uses ${INSTALL_SIZE} if defined, else
> runs wc -c piped from tar -xzf, appends to
> ${FILESDIR}/SIZES with pseudo filename ``size-of-install''
Can be easily derived from package size.
> package-size-get (depends on package)
> Uses ${PACKAGE_SIZE}, if defined, else
> does a wc -c of the package tar-ball,
> inserts package distribution size into ${FILESDIR}/SIZES
This isn't worthwhile. I feel to lazy to outline the reasons.
:) Just imagine the possible circumstances where you would use
it and compare to the alternative of manually checking.
> port-size-get - depends on clean
> Uses ${PORT_SIZE} if defined, else
> does a du -s on ${.CURDIR}, replaces in ${FILESDIR}/SIZES
> hence with a couple of runs, will be accurate, even though
> it will change its own value. puts in a psudo-filename
> ``size-of-port''. Perhaps it should automatically run
> twice.
Is this worthwhile? The ports collection as a whole is pretty
small. Unless there are some monstrous patches, the size of the
port itself is generally insignificant. If there are monstrous
patches, it's generally just as easy to check the file sizes of
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports-current/games/tvp-0.9.7/patches
as it is to download and read
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports-current/games/tvp-0.9.7/pkg/SIZES.
> size-to-build
> check missing dependencies, include THEIR size-to-build's
> in a summary report. This is the one to be used the most
This logically belongs with make-size. I disapprove of
make-size, though. Accordingly, I comment on its theoretical
existance in my response to fetch-size. Just so you know. :-)
--
Outnumbered? Maybe. Outspoken? Never!
tIM...HOEk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.3.96.970814204245.24264A-100000>