Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:21:34 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: autoamtic plists (was: Re: cvs commit: ports/audio/linux-openal bsd.linux.mk) Message-ID: <20051203162134.02a8cb27@Magellan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20051202200407.0dd89f9b.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> References: <200511261918.jAQJIp91001719@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051201152026.lxwvpjokc0sw0okc@netchild.homeip.net> <20051202121534.44c2c7be.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> <20051202142827.2s3y42ss8w0o0g0o@netchild.homeip.net> <20051202163734.23814a2f.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> <20051202180608.nvo7zkvp1wswkcs0@netchild.homeip.net> <20051202200407.0dd89f9b.jylefort@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 20:04:07 +0100 Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 18:06:08 +0100 > Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> wrote: > > > >> >> - why do you use different ways of specifying the paths in DESCR > > >> >> and MD5_FILE? > > >> >> - why do you specify DESCR at all? > > >> > > > >> > The idea is to use the FreeBSD native port's pkg-descr. > > >> > > >> I don't think this is good. I think the descr should mention that the ports > > >> provide the linux versions of the port. > > > > > > It's obvious from the package name and comment. But once again, people > > > are free to bypass this helper if they don't like it. > > > > It may be obvious for us, but not obvious for others. I like it to be > > unambiguos. Let's do it the other way around (POLA): If someone want's to > > override it, he can set it to the FreeBSD port description in the port > > itself. > > Shrug. Ok. Thanks. > > >> automatic plist generator to write their own plists. It also allows to look > > >> up the contents of the port without a need to install it. And we're able to > > >> answer questions like "which port installs file X". So we get the good > > >> features of both worlds, don't you think? > > > > > > I've added new-plist and NO_AUTOMATIC_PLIST for auto plist haters. > > > > This doesn't address the "lookup" and "will-be-installed-by" parts above (ok, > > they are the same, but...). These are major topics. You can read on ports@ > > from this week about someone who tries to write an application which does > > something like this but has problems because of the automatic plists. Having > > the static plists (auto-generated or by hand) in the tree, also helps in > > support requests, since someone with experience just can tell "install port > > X" to a newbie, even if he doesn't know anything about the port in question > > himself. > > > > So there's demand, and we mostly can satisfy it, but when we go the "all > > automatic" way, we can't anymore. > > > > I can understand that with a really good automatic mechanism, there will be > > less errors in the plist (specially some like those I produced in the last > > two weeks), but we can have the good part of this mechanism and the good > > part of plists in the tree just with the "new-plist" target. > > > > Are there any technical arguments which makes it mandatory to use your > > version of install-time generated plists instead of my proposal to commit > > the automatically generated plist? > > We have already discussed this: > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports/2005-September/071826.html And the metadata infrastructure you outlined in this thread isn't here. So the concerns which are raised in the discussion starting in http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2005-January/019974.html can't be met. Since your switch to install-time plist generation would result in reduced usability of the ports tree, at least for those people which are able to read a plist or at least how to extract some information out of it, I ask you again to go the "commit the autogenerated plist" way in bsd.linuxrpm.mk to respect POLA of those people (BTW: this would be the majority of people which participated in the thread I started in January). It doesn't result in much more work (just a "make new-plist") and provides the same feature while addressing all concerns noted in "my" thread. BTW: most of my commits today to the linux-* ports contained changes to the plist which I autogenerated with the "new-plist" target of x11-toolkits/linux-gtk. After autogenerating the plist I had to modify the plist to DTRT. If you can come up with a smarter way of autogenerating the plist, the work involved until you're be able to commit a generated plist (after updating the version number of the port and fetching the distfiles) is negligible. Bye, Alexander. -- Press every key to continue. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051203162134.02a8cb27>