From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Oct 12 08:27:55 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5E7C0D8CF for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:27:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CB6C3C5 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:27:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from julian-mbp3.pixel8networks.com (50-196-156-133-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.196.156.133]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u9C8RmhZ084072 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 12 Oct 2016 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Subject: Re: harder and harder to avoid pkg To: "Vlad K." , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <638fe078-80db-2492-90be-f1280eb8d445@freebsd.org> From: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <0feda216-98b9-fa26-c34f-237b73debb38@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 01:27:43 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:27:55 -0000 On 12/10/2016 1:13 AM, Vlad K. wrote: > On 2016-10-11 20:59, Julian Elischer wrote: >> are unsuitable for some situations. We really need to follow the lead >> of some of the Linux groups and have -runtime and -devel versions of >> packages, OR we what woudlbe smarter, woudl be to have several "sub >> manifests" to allow unpacking in different environments. > > Is as adding a "HEADERS" or whatever you want to call the option to > ports, a solution? Like we have DOC for documentation, an option > that could be PLIST sub'd and switch installation of > include/whatever.h and friends? what I really need is a RUNTIME option that produces a package with only those files needed to satisfy external run-time depdencies, or the actual demands of the user itself. However since those files are all in the regular package, It'd make sense to just apply the regular package to some filter that only allowed those files to be extracted. For many packages the whole output would be a single file. (This would be true for any package that produces a single .so such as libjpeg or libtiff etc. ). The pkg database would however report the package being installed, thus satisfying other packages that look in the database for dependencies. Giving it another name (e.g. foo-runtime-3.2 ) would make the dependencies not match it. > > Yes it's a ton of work requiring to go through many ports, but > looking at a random sample, it could be scripted and manual labor > reduced. > > To me something like this sounds very much consistent what other > options, like DOC and MANPAGES, already do. And with individual > options you don't presume package roles like -dev or -runtime or > -whatever and you can combine as you want them. > > And eventually if, hopefully when, package variants are implemented, > maybe the official pkg repo can include all the variants, but then, > I think, that's only a matter of logistics and resource available to > build all those combinations and store them. But the basic mechanism > for it should be a port option, imho. > > >