Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 23:03:49 +0100 From: Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org> To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@freebsd.org> Cc: Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org>, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Should every package also have a port? Message-ID: <19990822230349.A72888@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> In-Reply-To: <vqcso5cp5rc.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; from Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami on Sun, Aug 22, 1999 at 01:40:55AM -0700 References: <19990821173427.A73931@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> <vqcso5cp5rc.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 22, 1999 at 01:40:55AM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > * The FreeBSD Documentation (FAQ, Handbook, et al) will shortly be available > * as FreeBSD packages, suitable for pkg_add(1). > > Are the methods for automatically building these checked in to the > repository? (I.e., is there a place in the doc tree where I can go > and type "make doc-packages" and have all the packages built?) Not yet. I posted a patch to docproj.docbook.mk to -doc yesterday that does it. Given the recent furore, I'm trying to avoid committing stuff to the tree that I haven't sent out as patches first. I'm sure you can understand why :-) With the patch applied you still need to do some extra work. Specifically, you need to put a "COMMENT" and "DESCR" file in each directory as well. Are packages *required* to have a COMMENT and a DESCR? I assume COMMENT is mandatory, and pkg_create(1) doesn't list "-d" as an optional argument, so I assume not. > Also, what is the reason why you prefer to build this yourself? (I > asked the same question the last time you brought it up but don't > remember your reply.) > > If you just put a "port" like the one in /usr/ports/japanese/handbook, > the packages will be built automatically by the package building > machines. They update the doc tree automatically before the build, so > they will give people very fresh packages a few times a week. Partly because they're not ports, so why put them in the ports tree? It's also one more level of indirection. If someone wants to build packages of the formatted documentation then they should be able to do it with just the doc/ tree checked out (IMHO). With the current (ports/japanese/handbook) approach, if you want to understand how to build a doc package you have to be able to read and understand the ports Makefiles. These are big, complicated, and do lots of things as well as package building. The doc/ Makefile's are considerably smaller, so it's easier for the interested proto-hacker to see what's going on. > * % cd /usr/ports/fdp/faq [1] > * % make "FORMATS=html html-split" LANG=en_US.ISO_8859-1 install > * > * would just run the equivalent of > * > * % pkg_add ftp://.../faq-en_US.ISO_8859-1-html.tgz > * % pkg_add ftp://.../faq-en_US.ISO_8859-1-html-split.tgz > * > * and where "make package" would be a no-op. Also, there could be no > * checksum file, because the documentation packages would be rebuilt daily > * (or, at the very least, weekly). > * > * Personally, I don't think this is worth the hassle. But I'm not a ports > * guy, so I figure the final call is in your hands. > > No, if the "port" is a something like that, it's definitely not worth > it. Right, that's pretty much all it would be. Part of the aim of the recent repo changes is to make it much, much easier to build the docs. So if someone has all the applications installed so that # cd /usr/ports/japanese/handbook # make install works, I'd much rather they were told to do # cd /usr/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/books/handbook # make install Here's another good reason why not -- as you've indicated in another message, the ports/ tree is now dependent on the structure and organisation of the doc/ tree. I think this kind of dependency is wrong. We should be trying to make these things more independent, not bring them closer together. N -- [intentional self-reference] can be easily accommodated using a blessed, non-self-referential dummy head-node whose own object destructor severs the links. -- Tom Christiansen in <375143b5@cs.colorado.edu> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990822230349.A72888>