Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 23:02:28 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Lev <leventelist@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pkg vs. port tree install Message-ID: <20150710230228.e5af6a3c.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <20150710224227.61057aa0@jive.levalinux.org> References: <20150710221129.639305cd@jive.levalinux.org> <20150710222219.c285e959.freebsd@edvax.de> <20150710224227.61057aa0@jive.levalinux.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:42:27 +0200, Lev wrote: > Just curious... why the git package doesn't install git-gui and gitk? Because the port maintainer who sets the default options decided that this is not a good idea. :-) In many cases, users seem to prefer the command-line git. When you add git-gui and gitk, both compile-time and run-time dependencies will increase. X will be required, along with many many libraries (due to the many involved levels of abstraction and dependendy). So the package is a "functional minimum", not a "possible maximum". Users who wish to extend the functionality can easily do so by building from source. However, pkg will probably soon find a way to deal with this: "package flavors", where you can chose a precompiled binary package depending on options. This is interesting. If you have n options, you'd need 2^n packages... :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150710230228.e5af6a3c.freebsd>