From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Jun 20 22:59:51 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from ymris.ddm.on.ca (p13.radon.sentex.ca [207.245.238.78]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E16B14CB1 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 1999 22:59:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dchapes@ddm.on.ca) Received: from squigy.ddm.on.ca (squigy.ddm.on.ca [204.50.152.10]) by ymris.ddm.on.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA20347; Mon, 21 Jun 1999 01:59:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from dchapes@squigy.ddm.on.ca) From: Dave Chapeskie Received: (from dchapes@localhost) by squigy.ddm.on.ca (8.9.3/8.8.7) id BAA24079; Mon, 21 Jun 1999 01:59:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <19990621015942.05355@ddm.on.ca> Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 01:59:42 -0400 To: Kris Kennaway Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Splitting a port into optional pieces... games/crossfire Mail-Followup-To: Kris Kennaway , ports@freebsd.org References: <19990621011522.36471@ddm.on.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i In-Reply-To: ; from Kris Kennaway on Mon, Jun 21, 1999 at 03:15:09PM +0930 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Jun 21, 1999 at 03:15:09PM +0930, Kris Kennaway wrote: > A lot of ports have conditional compilation behaviour based on > environment variables, like USE_GTKCLIENT, NO_SOUND, etc. Based on > which variables are set or unset, different PLISTS, LIB_DEPENDS, etc, > are invoked. You might be able to get away with providing all the > optional functionality you want with only a single port, or a base > port + additional maps, etc. I'm sure it can be done in a single port (for the client that is, the server should still be a separate port no matter what) except that making a pre-built package for the FreeBSD CDs and the FTP site then becomes difficult. I would think it's fine to have the pre-built package always use the new sound system but making it only X11 or only GTK (or both, ick) isn't all that desirable IMHO. > In the interests of KISS I'd say the fewer ports you make the better. Actually I thinks it's simpler having multiple ports in this case which is why I suggested it. I of course may be entirely wrong :-) > Kris > ----- > "Never criticize anybody until you have walked a mile in their shoes, > because by that time you will be a mile away and have their shoes." > -- Unknown [End of Kris Kennaway's message] -- Dave Chapeskie, DDM Consulting To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message