Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:07:25 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@sigpipe.cz> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: [SUGGEST] Reform eclipse and eclipse related ports Message-ID: <20051018160725.GB87664@isis.sigpipe.cz> In-Reply-To: <20051018153752.GB11790@soaustin.net> References: <5739E97B-7EDC-4971-9EA5-01A44688A981@softweyr.com> <43522953.6050700@ebs.gr> <1B8112AF-8C0E-4BA0-8D1C-DA6AD529F327@softweyr.com> <20051017153024.GA23494@arabica.esil.univ-mrs.fr> <20051017212748.GD71766@isis.sigpipe.cz> <790a9fff0510171505i4010cc05yc30f67d459d1a0e4@mail.gmail.com> <20051018010446.GH71766@isis.sigpipe.cz> <20051018011616.GA57969@xor.obsecurity.org> <FC88505D-7FB0-4AF3-821B-BBB88B0E82C7@softweyr.com> <20051018153752.GB11790@soaustin.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
# linimon@lonesome.com / 2005-10-18 10:37:52 -0500:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 11:39:52PM -0700, Wes Peters wrote:
> > I'm not pointing this out for my use; I'm pretty adept at finding
> > stuff in ports. I have a lot of co-workers who are experienced
> > programmers but not necessarily experience FreeBSD'ers and they often
> > have trouble finding ports even when they (almost) know the name.
>
> That highlights my point that IMHO we need two different functionalities:
> 'search' and 'browse'. 'make search' is barely adequate for searching.
What are you missing from make search? I'll try and add it if it's
within reasonable bounds of complexity.
> We have nothing at all for browsing (unless you count reading an entire
> list of ports in hierarchy as 'browsing', which even an old command-line
> kind of guy like me thinks is crude).
Can you define 'browsing'?
> IMHO these things are better addressed at the application level, not
> inside bsd.port.mk itself. See sysutils/portmanager for what I think
> is an interesting first step towards that direction.
How will the Wes' colleagues find it? You need to be able to find a
port to install it. If a port is required to make sense of the
structure, we need a bootstrap mechanism, like something in the
base. Like, ls.
> That's where I think our work should focus, not on directory structure.
Doesn't ls belong on the application level? It's the simplest tool
that does the job quite fine (use a well configured shell with
explicit support for FreeBSD ports, eg zsh, and you'll never look
back), and you can combine it with other intimately familiar tools
such as sed, awk, make, whatever.
I would certainly prefer if we considered the fs structure to be the
primary interface (and treated it accordingly). I'm weird, I know.
--
How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb?
You don't know, man. You don't KNOW.
Cause you weren't THERE. http://bash.org/?255991
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051018160725.GB87664>