Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:16:09 +0000 From: Florent Thoumie <flz@FreeBSD.org> To: Niclas Zeising <niclas.zeising@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: X.org (experimental) ports moving to LOCALBASE soon Message-ID: <45A37979.4060102@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <bc292860701090223s24b7b638g1dd770838aed6033@mail.gmail.com> References: <45A2F08B.1010009@FreeBSD.org> <20070109020347.GB2599@mail.scottro.net> <bc292860701090223s24b7b638g1dd770838aed6033@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigEF3AA79AEA59C9D89FCF0F20
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Niclas Zeising wrote:
> On 1/9/07, Scott Robbins <scottro@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 01:31:55AM +0000, Florent Thoumie wrote:
>> >
>>
>>
>> > Now that most ports are X11BASE-clean, I'm going to move X.org ports=
to
>> > ${LOCALBASE} (as opposed to ${X11BASE}, where they live now). So exp=
ect
>> > a commit talking about X.org PREFIX in the next few days.
>> >
>> > Actually, I advise using git-whatchanged and git-log before you make=
>> any
>> > upgrade of your installed ports. The prefix change should need a
>> > PORTREVISION bump but I won't do it (cause I'm too lazy), so you'll
>> have
>> > to type something like "portupgrade -R xorg\*".
>> >
>=20
> [SNIP]
>=20
>>
>> My own list--(it'd be great if other people give their opinions
>> too--SirDice, if you're reading this, it's a start at our xorg-lite) :=
)
>=20
> Um, speaking of xorg-lite, I was thinking a bit about doing an
> option-based xorg install, where you can choose what to install at
> config-time via the ncurses-based framework. The options will
> propably mostly be related to drivers and maybe some apps in that
> case. The drawback is that we might get horrible Makefiles because of
> all options and so on... But anyway, what do you guys think? I'm not
> even sure if it's doable, it's just an idea.
I was thinking of writing a default set of dependencoes and giving the
opportunity to select the exact bits you want to install (like a USE
flag). Assuming there's like ~300 ports, I'm not sure to go the OPTIONS w=
ay.
--=20
Florent Thoumie
flz@FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD Committer
--------------enigEF3AA79AEA59C9D89FCF0F20
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFo3l/MxEkbVFH3PQRCucuAJ4qyG2XYqa2jkjfu8lhQSRbyqnSIACfbav/
jBWXvVtptetXJQS1QemQPSw=
=wnMs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enigEF3AA79AEA59C9D89FCF0F20--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45A37979.4060102>