From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 3 02:26:57 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFCBD16A4CE for ; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 02:26:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.liwing.de (mail.liwing.de [213.70.188.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9500643FBD for ; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 02:26:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rehsack@liwing.de) Received: (qmail 18425 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2003 10:26:55 -0000 Received: from stingray.liwing.de (HELO liwing.de) ([213.70.188.164]) (envelope-sender ) by mail.liwing.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 3 Nov 2003 10:26:55 -0000 Message-ID: <3FA62D6F.3030603@liwing.de> Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 10:26:55 +0000 From: Jens Rehsack User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031102 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexander Leidinger References: <200311021927.hA2JRIt2074978@freefall.freebsd.org> <1067833233.258.10.camel@localhost> <20031103045730.GV96543@toxic.magnesium.net> <1067843548.3865.17.camel@localhost> <20031103103238.73172852.Alexander@Leidinger.net> <3FA62265.5000203@liwing.de> <20031103111219.2f648450.Alexander@Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20031103111219.2f648450.Alexander@Leidinger.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/58840: [PATCH] exclude possiblyunrequireddependenciesfrom x11/gnome2 X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: FreeBSD GNOME Users , Jens Rehsack List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 10:26:58 -0000 Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 09:39:49 +0000 > Jens Rehsack wrote: > > >>>I don't want to push this change into the tree, but I think it would be >>>a good idea to have it. The sole reason of this mail is to understand >>>the reasoning of the rejection. >> >>As far I understood, x11/gnome2 and x11/gnome2-fifth-toe are ports as >>specified by the Gnome team. So the ports installed by this port are >>defined by specification. > > > Let's have a look at the quakeforge port. Without specifying any knobs > it installs all files defined by specification (as in: "the authors > specify files x, y and z as the files which should get installed by > default"). But the port also has some knobs which allows an user who > knows what he wants to modify this specification (e.g. without servers, > without client and/or without tools). quakeforce isn't split into > several ports as gnome is, but it isn't as large as gnome is. In my POV > both ports are equal, so why do we threat them differently? > > XFree86-4 was converted into a meta-port a while ago to offer the > possibility to only install parts of it. While it doesn't has knobs to > allow this on XFree86-4 level, it doesn't need to, as there aren't as > many packages as gnome needs to install. So we offer an easy possibility > for XFree86-4. Why can't we offer something similar for gnome? You can as you can do with XFree86-4. Neither more nor less :-) Of course, like with XFree86-4, you cannot install the meta-port but you must install each component depending your own decision separately. Jens