From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 15 12:55:55 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A75116A4A0 for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 12:55:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stapleton.41@gmail.com) Received: from wx-out-0102.google.com (wx-out-0102.google.com [66.249.82.207]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 037F543D45 for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 12:55:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from stapleton.41@gmail.com) Received: by wx-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id s19so80652wxc for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 05:55:54 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=E2V3cu9KYhIfzZcCWSVyh7OGiBB7l/egilAxhhFe6KmITROQVUXh65NJsEVJI+EfdsRJWJJiwYZF59Llp6zRiPMTcC8Tt9cqayOaNtf8pBQTgWn4WHBW60lK2O16d5rcwPViIqXfcdT2KTzgOhoa+ssPt/dxA4tFDPOfFgmYwYc= Received: by 10.70.99.2 with SMTP id w2mr6926672wxb; Mon, 15 May 2006 05:55:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.76.10 with HTTP; Mon, 15 May 2006 05:55:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <80f4f2b20605150555q547a034ax8effe6b1b6df1f30@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 08:55:53 -0400 From: "Jim Stapleton" To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <00d401c67802$ed3be130$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <446786CF.6050807@fromley.net> <3aaaa3a0605141906k2622e9dawe7e9bf7def72167@mail.gmail.com> <008b01c677fb$c99b4290$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> <44684361.5080903@eftel.com> <00d401c67802$ed3be130$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> Subject: Re: Has the port collection become to large to handle. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 12:55:56 -0000 maybe this is a bit off target, but it seems to me the ports tree is not too large: I've found stuff I've wanted that wasn't on the ports tree. I think it's too small. Unless you are on a 56k, but then everything ports related will be painful. However a reoganization could be in order... Currently we have: portbase/category/port/ Each category could have hundreds of ports that are related in the category, but clutter a search, especially in categories with over 100 ports... My suggestion, why not add another level: portbase/category/subcategory/port/ As well as some "virtual" categories, such as all "perl", "python", "php", and "c_c++" will be put under lang as sub-categories, with _all_ modules for these languages, and then if you are thinking "mysql access for python" while doing your ports search, you'll go to the databases/mysql/ subcategory, and see a symlink to the python module to access mysql. And then there would be a dependancy translation table: it if a dependancy isn't found, it'll look on the table, which will convert from the current structure to the new structure within the port make system, and hopefully prevent most/all change issues. Sorry if this suggestion is too farr off the topic (or already been posted, I got about half way through, and found I need to get to work...) Thanks, -Jim