Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 15:41:22 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Upgrade Tool Message-ID: <20060504194122.GA70303@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20060504192308.GE28973@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: <44538D42.8030301@chrismaness.com> <200605010901.50654.aren.tyr@gawab.com> <20060501091523.GA38820@pentarou.parodius.com> <200605021827.34873.aren.tyr@gawab.com> <20060504094155.GC984@roadrunner.q.local> <20060504165727.GA67780@xor.obsecurity.org> <20060504183936.GC28973@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <20060504191512.GA69895@xor.obsecurity.org> <20060504192308.GE28973@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 12:23:08PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote: > > Do all combinations really need packages? With or without flavours > > you wouldn't even think about building packages for all possible > > combinations of build options for a port. >=20 > All combinations don't need packages, but I'd like an easy way to build > as many as half a dozen versions on the same machine so users can use > the compiler and MPI version of their choice. At this point the easiest > way to handle that would be to build non-conflicting slave ports for the > combinations I wanted but that starts to waste a lot of inodes pretty > fast. A few extra ports don't hurt, really - it's a minor perturbation on the steady growth of the ports tree. From my point of view, it's a good feature of the slave port approach that it makes the developer think a bit about what combinations are really needed as separate packages (since they have to do a small bit of work to set up each one). Anyone adding n! slave ports is going to quickly get noticed and smacked :-) > Another option that could work for me would be to make it easier to > maintain a local ports category so I could have my own slave ports. You should be able to do that by just appending to SUBDIR and CATEGORIES in a Makefile.local or similar. It's been discussed recently, anyway. Or since this is for your own use you could just have one port and write a trivial script that repeatedly packages it with your own set of option combinations. Kris --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEWljiWry0BWjoQKURAvdnAKDb1iLO3UKDoVYCSkipQMH5IFBgcQCfU+Wy TtTYCN5iOF5tIocVdmEExfs= =XRAM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060504194122.GA70303>