Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:49:36 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes <darklogik@pittgoth.com> To: Valentino Vaschetto <logo@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Dima Dorfman <dima@trit.org>, doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: <port> replacement Message-ID: <3C697FE0.90608@pittgoth.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0202121137570.11667-100000@wrath.forked.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Valentino Vaschetto wrote: > I like this idea. The only issue I have with it is the fact that it's > only a package. Would it be possible to have 2 new roles? A > package role and a port role? > > -val > > On Sun, 10 Feb 2002, Dima Dorfman wrote: > > >>I propose to replace the <port> tag with <filename> and a "role" >>attribute as follows: >> Can I add to Val's thought. I thought everything was a port, but some have prebuilt "packages"... Now if i'm correct on that notion (I don't think i've ever seen a package with no port other than the yahoo IM, but that isn't even on the FreeBSD site. I think the filename tag and a role attribute is fine, but wouldn't a role="package" role="port" confuse some people or maybe be a bit overkill? In a sence, just use the role="port" or maybe mix both the old method and the new to become role="net/cvsup" or similar so that it leads to that port, and the reader will have to choose to download the package or do a make install in the ports directory :) Just a quick opinion, if it matters, I just think that having package defeats the purpose because then users have 2 options (use the port? or use the package?) -- Tom (Darklogik) Rhodes www.Pittgoth.com Gothic Liberation Front www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C697FE0.90608>