Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:07:24 -0800 (PST)
From:      Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ports/pkg/OS integration 2.0 (was: Re: Removing documentation)
In-Reply-To: <56BE0E5E.7020102@ohlste.in>
References:  <CA%2BE3k91JR8Fpax%2BC3Q_kPXpnHrtikKADVqkUWeC1MQJe=PLnnw@mail.gmail.com> <56BE0E5E.7020102@ohlste.in>

| previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> (The Ubuntu /etc/alternatives symlink system and other mechanisms solve
>> this well)

That hasn't been my experience but then I'm not a big fan of symlinks
which can't be safely modified outside of the (d)pkg system.  As a
general rule you want to avoid such unnecessary layers of abstraction
where possible.

>> * if the user's port configuration options aren't different from the
>> package defaults, ask the user if they want to use the package instead
>> (with global and per-port knobs to stop asking if the user desires).

Can't really see much use for this.  Those of us building from source
know when we can install a binary and nobody really wants to be
held-up by another prompt.

Roger



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?>