Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:17:12 +0200 From: Andrea Venturoli <ml@netfence.it> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Port system "problems" Message-ID: <4FE97008.2060501@netfence.it> In-Reply-To: <4FE96BA0.6040005@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <4FE8E4A4.9070507@gmail.com> <20120626065732.GH41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20120626092645.Horde.HytQbVNNcXdP6WQ1aMtjoMA@webmail.df.eu> <4FE96BA0.6040005@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 06/26/12 09:58, Matthew Seaman wrote: > 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 (foo-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? Can I share my 2c? Because it will just multiply be three the number of ports each of us has to install/maintain/upgrade/etc... bye av.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FE97008.2060501>