From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 4 12:41:08 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A750116A4CE for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:41:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from electricrain.com (electricrain.com [64.71.143.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0952543FCB for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:41:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from fuzzy@electricrain.com) Received: (qmail 15402 invoked by uid 540); 4 Nov 2003 20:41:07 -0000 Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:41:07 -0800 From: Chris Doherty To: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <20031104204107.GF25638@zot.electricrain.com> References: <20031104182139.GB37133@andouillette.esil.univ-mrs.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031104182139.GB37133@andouillette.esil.univ-mrs.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: XEmacs X-Koan: mu. X-Message-Flag: This message contains absolutely no malicious code. Organization: The Inside Foundation Subject: Re: Building Java ports from sources or not ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: chris-freebsd@randomcamel.net List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:41:08 -0000 On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 07:21:39PM +0100, Herve Quiroz said: > I was wondering if it is actually relevant to try and build Java ports > from source. Indeed I used to agree with this policy (mostly because it > allows the user to be sure that all dependencies are installed as well) > but it is quite painful to maintain. ... > So do we need to agree on some common policy or is it a "per-case" > issue? seems like a per-case thing to me, and up to the port maintainer--I don't think the port maintainers are obligated to have a port build from source if binary works just as well, and I know in my case I don't need to wait an hour (slow machine) to get an Ant package identical to a binary. like the old cvsup-bin port was a real time- and space-saver for those of us who didn't need to wait a day and end up with modula-3 installed. if there are no functionality or security issues, I'd vote for maintainer's choice. I guess you'd be kind of hosed if you wanted to install from source, though...maybe use the source distro to compile your own binary package or something. chris ------------------------------- Chris Doherty chris [at] randomcamel.net "I think," said Christopher Robin, "that we ought to eat all our provisions now, so we won't have so much to carry." -- A. A. Milne -------------------------------