From owner-freebsd-ports  Fri Jun 26 16:21:56 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA24858
          for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from vader.cs.berkeley.edu (vader.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.38.234])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA24630
          for <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:20:35 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by vader.cs.berkeley.edu (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA09208; Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199806262320.QAA09208@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>
To: seggers@semyam.dinoco.de
CC: ac199@hwcn.org, seggers@semyam.dinoco.de, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
In-reply-to: <199806262003.WAA00689@semyam.dinoco.de> (message from Stefan Eggers on Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:03:18 +0200)
Subject: Re: Concurrent package making allowed?
From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

 * I'm not crazy.  It looks as if older sysinstall versions ignore the
 * additional fields to the end and someone suggested to put it into the
 * INDEX file.

Nobody's saying you are crazy. :)  It's just that adding a new column
to ports/INDEX will make our repository grow by almost 300KB, so he
suggested that we look if there are any other things we might want to
add at the same time.

 * 		As this removes the need for a separate SIZE file and
 * also decreases the amount of processing needed at package installation
 * time (otherwise one would have to merge INDEX and SIZE) I think this
 * is the right way to do it.

Um, I think we want a separate SIZE file regardless of what's going to 
happen to INDEX.  Otherwise "make index" will have to depend on
installing all ports (unless I'm misunderstanding something grossly).

Sorry, but can you summarize what's the proposed changes?  I'm way
behind in my mail and don't have time to go through the dozen or so
ping-pong on this issue.

No need to talk about implementation details, just the general design
and interface and stuff (like, exactly *who* measures the size of the
port, etc.).  50 lines max, please.

Satoshi

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message