Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 16:06:19 -0500 From: "Jeremy Messenger" <mezz7@cox.net> To: "Jean-Yves Lefort" <jylefort@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net>, alejandro@varnet.biz, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/games Makefile ports/games/linux-ut2003-demo Makefile distinfo pkg-descr ports/games/linux-ut2003-demo/files ut2003-demo.in Message-ID: <op.swljktc29aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com> In-Reply-To: <20050904222210.15eaa37f.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> References: <200509032046.j83KkpQL082427@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050904124420.545395cb@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20050904171849.21d7613c.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> <20050904185122.29cc5e11@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20050904204037.04bda915.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> <20050904215045.1fa907f5@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20050904222210.15eaa37f.jylefort@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 15:22:10 -0500, Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 21:50:45 +0200 > Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> wrote: > >> On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 20:40:37 +0200 >> Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> >> > On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 18:51:22 +0200 >> > Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> wrote: >> > >> > > On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 17:18:49 +0200 >> > > Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> > > >> > > > > > Log: >> > > > > > Add linux-ut2003-demo. >> > > > > >> > > > > Why is it necessary to generate the plist at install time? As >> far as I >> > > > > can see the port installs a fixed set of files and doesn't do >> any magic >> > > > > to prevent the installation of files depending on a complex set >> of >> > > > > options or the state of the moon. >> > > > >> > > > It reduces the size of the port by about 40kb, and eases future >> updates. >> > > >> > > We had a discussion on ports@ a while ago: As long as there are no >> very >> > > urgent reasons to use a install-time generated plist a maintainer >> > > should (as in: we point with fingers on you if you don't do it) use >> a >> > > static plist since it is more beneficial for most people. >> > >> > The pkg-plist/PLIST_*/MAN*/PORTDOCS/... set is not meant to be >> > human-readable. See x11/nvidia-driver/pkg-plist for an example. >> >> They are human-readable ATM and a lot of procedures rely on this. There >> are always exceptions, but the ut demo ports don't need to be >> an exception. Please reread the thread I mentioned before you come up >> with other arguments since it's beaten to death already. > > I disagree with your interpretation of human-readability. > > The output of pkg_info -L is human-readable. Isn't 'pkg_info -L' only can be seen if you installed port? What about non-install? I always support static plist by 100%. Cheers, Mezz > A mixture of @exec, > PLIST_SUB, PLIST_FILES, PLIST_DIRS, MANn, MANLANG, PORTDOCS, > USE_RC_SUBR, GCONF_SCHEMAS (and so on, ad nauseam) is not. > >> [suggestions about new metadata handling] >> >> This is out of the scope of what I want to discuss, feel free to start >> a new thread with a meaningful subject. > > No, my suggestions address all the concerns (minus the portlint one) > you raised in your January post to ports@. -- mezz7@cox.net - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.swljktc29aq2h7>