Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 15:46:11 -0400 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Third "RFC" on on pkg-data ideas for ports Message-ID: <p06020414bcd7feb5f782@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <20040524193815.21b18d80@Magellan.Leidinger.net> References: <p0602040dbcd716257540@[128.113.24.47]> <20040524193815.21b18d80@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 7:38 PM +0200 5/24/04, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >On Mon, 24 May 2004 00:07:34 -0400 >Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> wrote: > >> b) create a new directory at the root directory of >> the ports collection. That directory would be >> called "Patches", and inside would be a directory >> for each category. Inside each Patches/category >> directory would be a single-file for each port >> in that category, where that single-file would >> have all the "ports-collection patches" for the >> matching port. > >ATM you can checkout one (new/updated) port from cvs into >any non-"ports/" directory and it will work just fine >(depending on the dependencies of the port). I don't see >how this is possible with [the above] approach. Hmm. Well, that is a good point. My intent is that would work, but at the moment I don't have any specific idea of how I'd want to implement that. As an end-user of ports, what I'd really like to do is 'cvsup refuse' the ENTIRE Patches tree, and then just download the patches for the ports that I'm actually building. However, I was assuming that the end-user would still be working in a copy of the entire ports-collection, so I was just going to download into ports/Packages. Maybe that isn't the right idea. I was also thinking that the ports collection could possibly take the tactic of downloading "ports-related" patches the same way it presently downloads tar-files of the original source. That would have nothing much to do with the pkg-data ideas, but it would be another way to reduce the size of "tracking the ports collection", as the number of ports in the collection continues to grow. I mean, we are now over 10,000 ports, and I imagine that VERY few users actually care about all 10,000 of those ports. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06020414bcd7feb5f782>