Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:15:26 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Tim Vanderhoek <ac199@hwcn.org>
To:        Sue Blake <sue@welearn.com.au>
Cc:        ac199@hwcn.org, Stefan Eggers <seggers@semyam.dinoco.de>, Satoshi Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Concurrent package making allowed?
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.980626220915.274E-100000@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <19980627120615.53392@welearn.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Sue Blake wrote:

> I have a problem, but I'm not sure whether adding a field for it is the
> ideal solution. When installing ports to a system not capable of running
> X it is often difficult to know whether that port requires X before a
> long expensive and frustratingly useless download. They aren't all

Another INDEX field is probably not the solution.  This is just a
dependency problem, and there are hundreds of dependencies... :)

> identified by their categories or path in INDEX (e.g. most of those
> listed under audio, some games, and graphics).

Ports that need X are identified by belonging to one of the
following categories:

X11
Tk41
Tk42
Tk80
Tk81

There is a number of ports that don't.  These ports are broken.
Report them if you find them.  :)

Ugh.  Looking over the list of all categories, you might have to
add "plan9" to the above list.  That's yucky.


--
This .sig is not innovative, witty, or profund.



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



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980626220915.274E-100000>