From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Oct 8 11: 2:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from winston.osd.bsdi.com (winston.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.229]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CAF537B503; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 11:02:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from winston.osd.bsdi.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winston.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e98I2dX98661; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 11:02:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com) To: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: CVSROOT avail In-Reply-To: Message from asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) of "08 Oct 2000 04:56:13 PDT." Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 11:02:39 -0700 Message-ID: <98657.971028159@winston.osd.bsdi.com> From: Jordan Hubbard Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [redirected to -ports] > Well, it only took 17 hours. :) > > I tried my best to be careful but I'm sure there are some ports that > broke as a result, so please be gentle! > > By the way, if you are expecting CVS to suddenly run faster, don't be > disappointed by it running as slow as ever. The speedup will only > come when the Attics are cleaned (a few months later) by the CVS > meisters. I guess I must have been asleep during the discussions which preceded this move since the rearrangement event didn't take me by surprise (you were very good about announcing that in advance) but the actual details of it did. I recognise that the package metadata does take up a bunch of inodes, though I don't quite see what advantage was incurred by moving it up one level from, say, pkg/PLIST to pkg-plist; can you perhaps explain it again for those of us like me who weren't paying attention the first time? Most notably, I'm wondering why you didn't simply fold all the package metadata into a single file with unique separators (even html-ish tags would do). Then the ports makefile infrastructure would simply separate it out into separate temp files for the rather rarely executed (for most folks anyway) "package" target. I think it's only that and the "describe" target which have any interest in the contents of the pkg/ directory unless you count the plist munging stuff, and that could be fairly easily changed to work from a single file as well. I should also note that the libh folks are working towards a packaging standard with a single package metadata file, so if we ever do manage to get that project finished and the ports collection migrated to a new package format, such a move would occur in any case. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message