Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:40:42 -0400 From: "Meenoo Shivdasani" <meenoo@gmail.com> To: "Vivek Khera" <vivek@khera.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Making a local branch of the ports tree Message-ID: <b5e09e920704262040wfe38698pad35185275211467@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4FEBCC0A-FBF5-4A30-83D0-EFF0B60450CA@khera.org> References: <20070425132239.64ebbb14.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <4FEBCC0A-FBF5-4A30-83D0-EFF0B60450CA@khera.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I use /usr/port/local and name all the ports "kci-XXX" for whatever > port we have. mostly these are pseudo ports which pull in all the > dependencies for our various server needs. (I'll probably post this > to my website sometime...) Having had the opportunity to utilize Vick's port methodology, I have to commend it as being superlative at simplifying things greatly and making it easier to standardize the installed packages on systems. Say that you have a system that will be a mail server -- you know that you want postfix and antivirus. No problem -- just create a local port that requires those items and install the local port on that system and it'll pull in the requires. It's hugely extensible and flexible. M
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b5e09e920704262040wfe38698pad35185275211467>