Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 21:11:17 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 204577] [NEW MODULE] Mk/Uses/nodejs.mk Framework for NodeJS projects/ports Message-ID: <bug-204577-13-a6ny3hiUWd@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-204577-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-204577-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D204577 --- Comment #32 from yuri@rawbw.com --- (In reply to Torsten Z=C3=BChlsdorff from comment #31) nodejs.mk fetches everything needed for the port during the fetch phase, th= en packages port with all dependencies so that this port always works the same way. Build doesn't require the network access. We use shrinkwrap feature th= at npm provides and recommends to use to freeze the dependencies. I just don't see how can individual ports be created for all dependencies. = This is a very large amount of work to maintain them. Also please note that different projects can require different versions. How can having a single version on ports suit such requirement? Also if the older distfile disappea= rs on the source, this will break the individual ports the same way. So besides saving the space having them doesn't provide any advantage in NodeJS case. I currently have 5 ports working, and looking at some other, larger project= s to make ports for. Making ports for simple projects is trivial, finding larger projects that can also be built on FreeBSD seems to be a challenge (few of = the ones that I found require large external C++ projects to work that weren't ported or require qt-5.5). --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-204577-13-a6ny3hiUWd>