Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:17:12 +0200
From:      Andrea Venturoli <ml@netfence.it>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Port system "problems"
Message-ID:  <4FE97008.2060501@netfence.it>
In-Reply-To: <4FE96BA0.6040005@infracaninophile.co.uk>
References:  <4FE8E4A4.9070507@gmail.com> <20120626065732.GH41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20120626092645.Horde.HytQbVNNcXdP6WQ1aMtjoMA@webmail.df.eu> <4FE96BA0.6040005@infracaninophile.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 06/26/12 09:58, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 26/06/2012 08:26, Marcus von Appen wrote:
>>>> 1. Ports are not modular
>
>>> What do you mean by modular? if you are speaking about subpackages it
>>> is coming,
>>> but it takes time
>
>> I hope, we are not talking about some Debian-like approach here (foo-bin,
>> foo-dev, foo-doc, ....).
>
> Actually, yes -- that's pretty much exactly what we're talking about
> here.  Why do you feel subpackages would be a bad thing?

Can I share my 2c?

Because it will just multiply be three the number of ports each of us 
has to install/maintain/upgrade/etc...

  bye
	av.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FE97008.2060501>