Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 Apr 2004 07:19:47 -0600
From:      Robin Schoonover <end@endif.cjb.net>
To:        des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=)
Cc:        Martin <nakal@web.de>
Subject:   Re: Second "RFC" on pkg-data idea for ports
Message-ID:  <20040414131949.3A56E43D31@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <xzp1xmq90gk.fsf@dwp.des.no>
References:  <p0602040cbca10a7dbe52@[128.113.24.47]> <20040413121925.GB29867@voodoo.oberon.net> <p0602041abca1e49dde40@[128.113.24.47]> <407C4035.8020609@ciam.ru> <p0602041fbca1ff481e60@[128.113.24.47]> <1081896823.772.58.camel@klotz.local> <xzp1xmq90gk.fsf@dwp.des.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:02:35 +0200, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote:
> Martin <nakal@web.de> writes:
> > I would personally like it to use XML. I'm developing a small
> > application which is a kind of GUI for ports (works like a
> > browser). It is very difficult to parse the Makefiles to find
> > out which version number and which dependencies it has. Some
> > versions (like KDE3) are just variables and I don't have an
> > idea how to fetch them yet.
>=20
> make -V
>=20

I use make -V a lot, and it's slow (every time you run it, make has to
reread all the bsd.*.mk files, such as bsd.port.mk).  The speed isn't much
of an issue when you only do one or two ports, but when you are examining
the entire ports collection, you notice.=20

That said, I'd still rather use a makefile based ports system anyway.

--=20
Robin Schoonover (aka End)
#
# Actual newspaper headline: Include your Children when Baking Cookies
#



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040414131949.3A56E43D31>