From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Sep 8 18: 7: 1 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F1A037B423; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 18:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id SAA81160; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 18:07:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 18:06:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: Will Andrews , FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: Ports Options Paper In-Reply-To: <200009082243.e88Mh9V05579@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: I havent had time to read this whole thread and comment in detail, but I'll say something here: > * Another issue that I've stumbled across over time has been the inability > * of a single port to create multiple packages. Hence, I'd like to reintroduce > > This is not a good idea. We've tried it before, and it was a > disaster. The current MASTERDIR has come out of the smoldering ashes > of failed attempts to create a framework to build multiple packages > from the same directory. > > "One package per port" is the First Principle of the Ports Collection > for a good reason. :) You might not be aware that OpenBSD seem to have done this with their FLAVORS system. Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message