Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 22:05:54 -0800 From: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> To: Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com> Cc: FreeBSD Ports Mailing List <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Again, flavors or options? Message-ID: <CAOjFWZ5n4QEaMvOVgzUt_DsozBU188BnLjEi0HDBzyXKuKtwaQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <85f87eb1-ab21-e802-866c-93d7edbfb92a@rawbw.com> References: <85f87eb1-ab21-e802-866c-93d7edbfb92a@rawbw.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 20, 2017 6:16 PM, "Yuri" <yuri@rawbw.com> wrote: I have the port for the digital currency. It has 3 parts that install non-intersecting file sets: daemon, cli, qt-ui. The commonality: same repository, same build options, same license, mostly same port options. I am attracted to the idea to use flavors to let users choose which part do they want: FLAVORS=default daemon qt cli "default" will install all of them, others will install individual parts. Option list will be slightly different for each flavor. One alternative: only have port options. Then some options can't be conditional on which parts are built. Another alternative: 3 slave ports. I don't like this idea at all. Do you think flavors are a good fit for this task? Sounds like a textbook example of sub-packages. Until then, slave ports would be the next-best thing as that provides separate packages that can be installed. Cheers, Freddie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOjFWZ5n4QEaMvOVgzUt_DsozBU188BnLjEi0HDBzyXKuKtwaQ>