From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 16 20:21:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B16116A4EA for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:21:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from lakermmtao07.cox.net (lakermmtao07.cox.net [68.230.240.32]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1340543D45 for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:21:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from conrads@cox.net) Received: from dolphin.local.net ([68.11.30.24]) by lakermmtao07.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.03.04 201-2131-111-106-20040729) with ESMTP id <20041016202116.UPBD3371.lakermmtao07.cox.net@dolphin.local.net> for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 16:21:16 -0400 Received: from dolphin.local.net (localhost.local.net [127.0.0.1]) by dolphin.local.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id i9GJW8VQ038473 for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:32:08 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from conrads@cox.net) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:32:03 -0500 From: "Conrad J. Sabatier" To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20041016143203.7d20298a@dolphin.local.net> In-Reply-To: <20041016141935.2d77ebea@dolphin.local.net> References: <20041016135618.00711a35@dolphin.local.net> <20041016210145.674cbade.lehmann@ans-netz.de> <20041016141935.2d77ebea@dolphin.local.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12b (GTK+ 1.2.10; amd64-portbld-freebsd6.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Ports with no pkg-plist files X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:21:19 -0000 On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:19:35 -0500, "Conrad J. Sabatier" wrote: > > OK, I'm a little out-of-date re: this stuff. :-) > > However, doing a subsequent scan of Makefiles turned up a large number > of them that don't define any PLIST* variables. > > In other words, the ports tree is rather inconsistent in this area, it > seems. The majority of ports still do have pkg-plist files, some have > PLIST* variables defined, some don't. > > I don't know what would be the preferred resolution to all of this, > but it *is* a little disturbing, don't you think? Just as a footnote: I personally would prefer to keep the pkg-plist files around. They greatly simplify the task of determining what files are provided by an uninstalled port (I use a script I wrote that takes advantage of these files for just this purpose, in fact). I don't want to re-open any old discussions here, just tossing out my $.02 worth. -- Conrad J. Sabatier -- "In Unix veritas"