Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 09:07:16 -0600 From: "Jeremy Messenger" <mezz7@cox.net> To: "Dmitry Marakasov" <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru> Cc: FreeBSD Ports Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Ports using SCM repositories as source instead of distfiles Message-ID: <op.ulz6y1ae9aq2h7@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20081211082325.GA6167@hades.panopticon> References: <20081209143052.GA29817@hades.panopticon> <873agxjn1x.fsf@chateau.d.lf> <20081209181354.GB29817@hades.panopticon> <87tz9di38u.fsf@chateau.d.lf> <20081209222042.GC29817@hades.panopticon> <8763lsi10m.fsf@chateau.d.lf> <20081210181125.GA86341@hades.panopticon> <87zlj3heor.fsf@chateau.d.lf> <20081210223522.GA6367@hades.panopticon> <87vdtrhb6r.fsf@chateau.d.lf> <20081211082325.GA6167@hades.panopticon>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 02:23:25 -0600, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru> wrote: > * Ashish Shukla आशीष शुक्ल (wahjava.ml@gmail.com) wrote: > >> This is what Debian and Gentoo does. Remember we don't have to pass >> DESTDIR variable to 'make -C /usr/ports/editors/emacs-cvs' instead it >> will be passed to the 'gmake' process invoked by port's Makefile. If we > > I understand. But you're implying that there is Makefile and it supports > DESTDIR. As I understand, you're referring to autotools-based ports. > Remember, those are less than 1/4 of the collection. > >> pass DESTDIR to port's commandline, then it will install all >> dependencies in that chroot which is not desired, we simply care about >> the files installed by that port. Since there're already 20,000 ports we >> can't do it by default, so we've to hack some knob (like >> REQUIRES_DYNAMIC_INSTALLATION) which if defined will enable this >> behaviour. > > So if I understand correctly, you're proposing to only use dynamic > plist generation for the ports that support it without modification, > i.e. autotools-based? > > My opinion is that we should support the feature for all ports, or don't > support it at all. Only getting rid of ~5k pkg-plists is not a huge > accomplishment considering the mess it causes and I doubt it's worth > the work on adding the feature to port.mk and then rebuilding and > testing all affected ports. Being able to forget about pkg-plists > once and forever however would be a huge accomplishment and if that's > possible it should be done sooner or later. I object on get rid of pkg-plist. I depend on pkg-plist too much. I think it's important for us to keep on track where the files/directories are. Cheers, Mezz -- mezz7@cox.net - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.ulz6y1ae9aq2h7>