Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 12:10:42 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Florent Peterschmitt <fpeterscom@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Port system "problems" Message-ID: <20120627101042.GQ41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <4FEAD6AE.7090603@gmail.com> References: <4FE8E4A4.9070507@gmail.com> <20120626065732.GH41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20120626092645.Horde.HytQbVNNcXdP6WQ1aMtjoMA@webmail.df.eu> <4FE96BA0.6040005@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20120626103400.Horde.8frYBVNNcXdP6XP4ZP-0deA@webmail.df.eu> <20120626084433.GJ41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <CADLFttdQ3RwhrB3Sk0UjbtT4EPW4wztPOak9KQLwR7GNyY8GZQ@mail.gmail.com> <4FEAD6AE.7090603@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--yPSgZSQ6mfPWgZ9n Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:47:26AM +0200, Florent Peterschmitt wrote: > On 26.06.2012 17:21, Jeremy Messenger wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:44 AM, Baptiste Daroussin<bapt@freebsd.org> = wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:34:00AM +0200, Marcus von Appen wrote: > >>> Matthew Seaman<m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk>: > >>> > >>>> On 26/06/2012 08:26, Marcus von Appen wrote: > >>>>>>> 1. Ports are not modular > >>>>>> What do you mean by modular? if you are speaking about subpackages= it > >>>>>> is coming, > >>>>>> but it takes time > >>>>> I hope, we are not talking about some Debian-like approach here (fo= o-bin, > >>>>> foo-dev, foo-doc, ....). > >>>> Actually, yes -- that's pretty much exactly what we're talking about > >>>> here. Why do you feel subpackages would be a bad thing? > >>> Because it makes installing ports more complex, causes maintainers to= rip > >>> upstream installation routines apart, and burdens users with addition= al tasks > >>> to perform for what particular benefit (except saving some disk space= )? > >>> > >>> If I want to do some development the Debian way, I would need to do t= he > >>> following: > >>> > >>> - install foo-bin (if it ships with binaries) > >>> - install foo-lib (libraries, etc.) > >>> - install foo-dev (headers, etc.) > >>> - install foo-doc (API docs) > >>> > >>> With the ports I am currently doing: > >>> > >>> - install foo > > I agree. > > > >> yes but you do not allow to install 2 packages one depending on mysql5= 1 and one > >> depending on mysql55, there will be conflicts on dependency just becau= se of > >> developpement files, the runtime can be made not to conflict. > >> > >> I trust maintainers to no abuse package splitting and do it when it ma= ke sense. > >> > >> In the case you give I would probably split the package that way: > >> foo (everything needed in runtime: bin + libraries) > >> foo-dev (everything needed for developper: headers, static libraries, = pkg-config > >> stuff, libtool stuff, API docs) > >> foo-docs (all user documentation about the runtime) > >> > >> of course there will be no rule on how to split packages, just common = sense. > > Disagree. We shouldn't split for that. Have you seen how many Linux > > users report when they can't compile one of application, just because > > they didn't install the *-dev? A LOT (thousands and thousands)! When > > it's A LOT then it means that it's flawed. If the upstream provide the > > split tarballs then I do not have any problem with it. > > > > Also, it will slow down the ports tree pretty bad if we do that way to > > all ports. > > > >> regards, > >> Bapt > > > Just don't make -dev package, that's really something stupid and I agree= =20 > with that. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" Once again it will be written nowhere that you need or not to create a -dev package, just do it as a maintainer if you think it make sense in your particular case! Bapt --yPSgZSQ6mfPWgZ9n Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk/q3CIACgkQ8kTtMUmk6ExPUgCeP6QSwQhI8c456CMmZdl1upmu FTkAnjg18asV0o4G5ItinfYNqRj4UljB =vAcs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --yPSgZSQ6mfPWgZ9n--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120627101042.GQ41054>