From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Oct 19 16:06:36 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3047450E
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 16:06:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mx5.roble.com (mx5.roble.com [206.40.34.5])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "mx5.roble.com", Issuer "mx5.roble.com" (not verified))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2022A6BB
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 19 Oct 2014 16:06:35 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 08:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: postgresql-server depends on client.  Why?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1413720000.70008.freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
References: <mailman.1.1413720000.70008.freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 16:06:36 -0000

> Palle Girgensohn <girgen@pingpong.net> wrote:
>> So, apart from the obvious "I want to upgrade the client separately
>> (before) the server", there are no arguments for not doing it the way we
>> do it now. But maybe that argument is enough to motivate a change?

KIS is one reason we do not install clients with server (of other DBs or
on other OSs).  Security standard practice also recommends client
software not be installed on server systems.

Considering how trivial it is to split client and server ports I can't
think of a good reason not to.

Roger