Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 20:28:10 +0000 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DEPENDS -- is it time to remove it? Message-ID: <20070105202810.010d4bea@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <cb5206420701050952k2a6943bfy7b16e4a2c4d9673a@mail.gmail.com> References: <459D08CA.7060104@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20070105173738.2f4d86c4@gumby.homeunix.com> <cb5206420701050952k2a6943bfy7b16e4a2c4d9673a@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 5 Jan 2007 20:52:50 +0300
"Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> On 1/5/07, RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> wrote:
> > Isn't DEPENDS still a sensible way of making
> > one metaport depend on another. For example
> > if someone wanted to create a personal desk-
> > top metaport that depends on KDE, xorg etc.
>
> People need programs, not ports.
It's not that straightforward when you want to depend on a
metaport like KDE. All of the binaries can be provided by individual
sub-ports. The sensible thing to do is create a dependency on KDE and
let KDE's options/knobs handle the lower dependencies. The ports tree
doesn't need to have metaports depend on metaports, but some people
find it useful to create their own.
>It's more
> sensible to run_depend on files than just on
> ports.
Looking at the porter's handbook it looks like the solution is to use
RUN_DEPENDS with${NONEXISTENT}, so I guess DEPENDS is redundant.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070105202810.010d4bea>