Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 22:43:01 -0300 From: Harlan Stenn <Harlan.Stenn@pfcs.com> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Current is currently really a mess (was: Re: Tk/Tcl broken(?)) Message-ID: <8988.870662581@mumps.pfcs.com> In-Reply-To: jkh@time.cdrom.com's message of "Sun, 03 Aug 1997 16:10:23 PDT." <4492.870649823@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Here are a couple possible solutions to the situation with ports.
First, go from the current paradigm to one that is more tightly based on
an autoconf/metaconfig basis. I figure this is a lousy idea, and is
probably unworkable.
Second, "enhance" the ports paradigm to support multiple versions of
FreeBSD. That way, each port can have FreeBSD-version-specific Makefile
and patches. With this scheme, a single copy of the ports tree could be
used to build/debug on a variety of versions of FreeBSD.
I'm suggesting these ideas bacause it's been my experience that *I*
prefer {sup,}porting a tree that looks like:
package1/target1
package1/target2
package2/target1
package2/target2
...
as opposed to:
target1/package1
target1/package2
...
target2/package1
target2/package2
...
especially when there are more packages than targets.
H
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8988.870662581>