From owner-freebsd-current Sat Aug 2 16:08:01 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA20558 for current-outgoing; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 16:08:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from genghis.eng.demon.net (genghis.eng.demon.net [193.195.45.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA20529 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 16:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from genghis.eng.demon.net [193.195.45.10] by genghis.eng.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 1.62 #1) id 0wunGs-0000CE-00; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 00:07:38 +0100 To: hoek@hwcn.org cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued Organization: Demon Internet Ltd. Reply-To: ade@demon.net In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 02 Aug 1997 18:59:08 EDT." Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 00:07:38 +0100 From: Ade Lovett Message-Id: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Tim Vanderhoek writes: > >Basically, we have this already modulo a idealisms you threw in. >:) Your example #2 is the meta-port concept that I mention. A >couple new features in bsd.port.mk would be wanted, but the major >groundwork is laid in the existing ports system. Well, it was the "meta-port" label that concerned me, so I'm looking for a bit of clarification, that's all. Rather than implement a meta-port concept, which does nothing but bundle ports together, we add in (a) the idea that a port may not build anything itself, and (b) the idea of dependencies in both source *and* binary form. For example: port-A only has a list of dependencies (port-B) port-B builds something itself, and also depends on port-B1 and port-B2 port-B1 only available in /binary form (say it's a simple list of configuration files) port-B2 available in both /source and /binary form, no need to grab the /source form if the /binary is already present on the system -aDe -- Ade Lovett, Demon Internet Ltd.