Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 10:38:21 -0400 From: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@p6m7g8.com> To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@ridecharge.com>, ruby@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [RFC]: RUBYGEM_AUTOPLIST implied by USE_RUBYGEMS=yes Message-ID: <49E0AB5D.60403@p6m7g8.com> In-Reply-To: <20090411113216.24170d6f.stas@FreeBSD.org> References: <49DFC680.9000104@ridecharge.com> <49DFCAEB.60505@p6m7g8.com> <20090411113216.24170d6f.stas@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I don't think it is a good idead as historically we prefer static pkg-plists > over dynamic ones. For ports where names of the files are perfectly known > AUTOPLIST feature is not required. When I introduced this option my intention > was to work around rdoc names generation problem and to not eliminate rubygem > pkg-plists entirely. *sigh*. Wouldn't every rubygem port have to use it to work around that issue (the zfs one?)? That means every rubygem should fail in QAT then b/c of the NOPORTDOCS .... he must be excluding them.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49E0AB5D.60403>