From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 25 15:00:52 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C3916A41C for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 15:00:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from meka@softhome.net) Received: from jive.SoftHome.net (jive.SoftHome.net [66.54.152.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5327243D1F for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 15:00:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from meka@softhome.net) Received: (qmail 9515 invoked by uid 417); 25 Jun 2005 15:00:51 -0000 Received: from shunt-smtp-out-0 (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.3.12) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 25 Jun 2005 15:00:51 -0000 Received: from hal9000 ([82.208.205.168]) (AUTH: PLAIN meka@softhome.net) by softhome.net with esmtp; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 09:00:49 -0600 Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:10:55 +0200 From: meka To: FreeBSD Message-Id: <20050625171055.1505c9fa.meka@softhome.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.0.0beta3 (GTK+ 2.6.7; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: New kind of ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 15:00:52 -0000 I've discovered existence of FreeBSD in 2000. That was the biggest discovery in my life. Ports system was just great. Then, I had to install linux and wipe out bsd. I've found gentoo the closest solution to freebsd's ports system. Portage (equivalent to ports in bsd) has some adventages (and disadventages, too, but purpose of this mail is inprooving ports system), but I would like to point out to just few of them. First is the download. If one does make fetch, interupts it, and does make fetch again, nothing happens. Second, why does make has such a weird dependency? I mean, wouldn't it be more logical to behave like make dependencies and then unpack it self? Now. This is a lot of work if one like to make things "right". There's nothing wrong with the old way, but it simply can be better. First, this idea with the new kind of ports would require a far less disk space if dependency tree is deep. I am willing to start making this new bsd.newports.mk, but is this going to be accepted if the nothing but those things I pointed out would be changed? I will start this work next month, but wouldn't like to start something the rest of you guys will not accept. Of course, anyone can join, but I have no server for this. If anyone would like to work with me on this, can you provide a server? It's not a problem for me to work alone, but I'm a dial-up user, so you see the problem with sharing the work. -- Pinguin? Daemon? Fish? Dragon fly? Grow up. Windows are the future, daemons and animals are for fairy tales.