Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 20:50:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> Cc: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.org>, Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Ports Options Paper Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009082044380.98451-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20000908213823.F632@radon.gryphonsoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Will Andrews wrote:
> What's wrong with the method he's suggesting? If you are worried about
> clashing WRKSRCs, just see one of my previous emails. All that needs to
> be adjusted is PKGNAME, and as long as the dependencies are satisfied, a
> package can be compiled and generated.
I suggest the way forward in this direction would be to actually implement
patches and look for any unexepcted problems.
But let's try and keep the number of concurrent projects to a minimum
since it's only a few of us involved, and probably fewer still who are
going to be writing patches - we have the improved versioning system about
to go in, it's probably most productive now to actually go and implement
one of the remaining ones, instead of talking about them all at once and
getting nowhere.
I suggest porting NetBSD's wildcard dependency and conflict stuff next.
Thats the next step towards an upgrade system.
Kris
--
In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate.
-- Charles Forsythe <forsythe@alum.mit.edu>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0009082044380.98451-100000>