From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 23 00:18:16 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 679B816A4CE for ; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 00:18:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from haggis.it.ca (haggis.it.ca [216.126.86.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE25D43D5E for ; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 00:18:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from paul@haggis.it.ca) Received: from haggis.it.ca (paul@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by haggis.it.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i9N0IC75043000; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:18:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from paul@haggis.it.ca) Received: (from paul@localhost) by haggis.it.ca (8.12.11/8.12.6/Submit) id i9N0ICdA042999; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:18:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from paul) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:18:12 -0400 From: Paul Chvostek To: Robin Schoonover Message-ID: <20041023001812.GA24347@it.ca> References: <20041022074529.GN10363@k7.mavetju> <41791AF7.2050009@vonostingroup.com> <200410221824.12294.benlutz@datacomm.ch> <20041022201425.GA36702@it.ca> <20041022165221.3c66232a@zork> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041022165221.3c66232a@zork> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/www is too full X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 00:18:16 -0000 On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 04:52:21PM -0600, Robin Schoonover wrote: > > > > A single directory with 12000 subdirectories in it may be unruly ... > > and we'd have to fix oddities like hydra, jags, replay, etc ... but it > > would provide for the most flexible expansion, and the symlink tree > > would provide an equivalent interface to folks comfortable with the > > current setup. > > Population. cvs (and probably cvsup) do not handle symlinks well. You > would have to have a script populate symlinked ports into the categories > by hand. Yes, that's what I was suggesting. A change like this would require that the symlinks not be part of the distribution, but be built by a tool like portsdb (nee portupgrade). The downside is that it's a fairly major architectural change that might break lots of stuff. The upside is that it's a SMOP, nothing really challenging. I'm not much of a ruby guy, but I could easily write a tool in awk to convert from current to revised layout, both in an installed ports tree and a repository. Making the existing pkgtools and portupgrade happy would be a bit more work... And we'd have to get everybody to agree on a process for adding new keywords. This would eliminate the usefulness of /usr/ports/MOVED, since everything would be in one place. If 12000 is just too frickin' many for a directory, perhaps some "titan" categories could be used to aggregate ports as they are now: app, devel, sysutil. Whatever would have the least chance of category overlap. MOVED can then still point to the new location, and cvsup may be a little happier. But what is the right design? For the folks who like the directories, would symlinks be acceptable? If we aggregate, does it make sense to go ALL the way, or continue to maintain some sort of logical division to real port homes, albeit fewer (and more atomic)? Just brainstorming here. Any idea is a good idea until you have to put it into production. -- Paul Chvostek Operations / Abuse / Whatever it.canada, hosting and development http://www.it.ca/