From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jul  6 14:13:35 2011
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 48AB21065670; Wed,  6 Jul 2011 14:13:35 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:13:35 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Nicola Vitale <nivit@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20110706141335.GA94807@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201106301334.p5UDYYZ0059582@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20110705164319.GA46561@FreeBSD.org>
	<CAEQKd7VTgdZsUpAGT78UGX5dJ+Cc_Fhy7w21pWcNZJZb9kjaEw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEQKd7VTgdZsUpAGT78UGX5dJ+Cc_Fhy7w21pWcNZJZb9kjaEw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/wbar Makefile distinfo pkg-descr
	pkg-plist ports/x11/wbar/files patch-Makefile patch-configure
	pkg-message.in
X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree <cvs-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 14:13:35 -0000

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 02:56:20PM +0200, Nicola Vitale wrote:
> Moreover, in my opinion, there are not advantages in terms of
> performance, and the package of pidof is about 4293 bytes after all.

Well, it's not really about size.  Infrastructure costs get higher (extra
dependency to track, upgrade, etc.) which in turn eats time.  Size of the
packages/distfiles does not really matter these days.

./danfe