From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Mar 30 16:45:20 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6FFE37BF6E; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:45:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id QAA74182; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:45:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:45:18 -0800 (PST) From: Kris Kennaway To: Will Andrews Cc: Ade Lovett , Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami , ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: final call: VERSION variable In-Reply-To: <20000330193323.B7713@argon.blackdawn.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Will Andrews wrote: > This has nothing to do with the number of inodes that port skeletons take > up. IIRC, however, symlinks do not take up inodes, so using a symlink > system would not affect the number of inodes used by an installed port. I'm not sure whether the above assertion is true, but in any case most people don't have 3187 ports installed, so the number of extra inodes would be negligible compared to the size of the ports collection itself. We probably wouldn't need symlinks for every single file in the PLIST - if a port installs its own directory we can just symlink the directory and the contents can only appear once. Having said this, the idea still scares me too :-) Kris ---- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message