From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Feb 4 12: 2: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from hub.lovett.com (hub.lovett.com [216.60.121.161]) by builder.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0E94430F for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 12:01:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from ade by hub.lovett.com with local (Exim 3.13 #1) id 12Glqm-0005DO-00; Fri, 04 Feb 2000 10:44:52 -0600 Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 10:44:52 -0600 From: Ade Lovett To: Chuck Robey Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Multiple identity ports (was Re: gd requiring X) Message-ID: <20000204104451.C17224@lovett.com> References: <20000203162952.B15558@lovett.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: ; from chuckr@picnic.mat.net on Fri, Feb 04, 2000 at 12:17:21AM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, Feb 04, 2000 at 12:17:21AM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote: > Ade Lovett wrote: > > > > For packages, it should be a (relatively) straightforward hack such > > that if we're installing "bar-gnome", we should first try to install > > "foo-gnome" as a dependent, falling back to plain old "foo" > > (possibly with a warning) if one isn't found. > > > > For ports, bar-gnome simply has a dependency on ${PORTSDIR}/xxx/foo-gnome, > > which sets WITH_GNOME=YES and includes xxx/foo > > What about some ports that have multiple, even 4 or five optional > dependencies. These *do* exist. Your naming plan isn't going to cover > that, and think about just how many packages what you propose *really* is > going to cause. It's not just a doubling. I know. I think I even said that a few lines down with "fairly major increase in the number of ports" - I have a penchant for understatement, I'm a limey, I can't help it :) It's not an inherently scalable idea for everything, I don't know what is, especially for those ports that (a) have a large number of optional dependencies, and (b) worse still, those that do (sometimes very subtle) different things at ./configure time depending on what you already have installed. In the (a) case, we have to make a tradeoff between the number of different ports/packages and the amount of bloat on the CD, in the ports tree, etc. Certainly, for a large "o" (optional dependencies), the [sum(nCo) n=0..o] is likely to be huge. Perhaps in this case we simply build a minimal and maximal case, and tell the end-user that there are other options at make or pkg_add time. (b) cases need to be fixed. The most obvious problems that I've seen so far (because I happen to be closest to it :) are those ports that have optional dependencies on GTK/GNOME with a USE_* variable, but don't do the right thing if GTK/GNOME is installed, and the USE_* variable is _not_ set. I don't understand enough about Jeremy's work yet to know whether this issue can be resolved easily. -aDe -- Ade Lovett, Austin, TX. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message