From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Sep 9 14:32:01 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA21888 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Wed, 9 Sep 1998 14:32:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from parsons.rh.rit.edu (d111-l052.rh.rit.edu [129.21.111.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA21864 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 1998 14:31:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mfisher@csh.rit.edu) Received: from mfisher (helo=localhost) by parsons.rh.rit.edu with local-smtp (Exim 1.92 #1) id 0zGrq4-00020t-00; Wed, 9 Sep 1998 17:31:44 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 17:31:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Mike Fisher X-Sender: mfisher@parsons.csh.rit.edu To: jher cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: suggestion In-Reply-To: <19980909145931.A29509@io.com> 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 Wed, 9 Sep 1998, jher wrote: > I would like to suggest a number of different ports kits. > I work for an ISP and I find myself grabbing the entire ports kit, installing > it (which takes forever) and then only using about 20% of the kit, if that. > What I would like to suggest is twofold: > > first: how about making tar files of each category? I.E. www.tar, net.tar, > etc.. That way I can just update an entire section of my ports collection at > once. Why not just use cvsup to do it? Take a look at /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile . Then get rid of the ports-all line and uncomment the individual collections that you want. > second: combine said categories into larger groups like "foreign.tar" which > has german, vietnamese, korean, etc.. in it.. "webserver.tar" which has say > net.tar, www.tar, shells.tar, lang.tar, etc.. How does this help? From my perspective, it just convolutes stuff even more than it already is. Just be selective in the different collections which you choose to gather. The only thing that I could see a use for your second suggestion would be for someone just getting started, where grabbing a few collections would be helpful. > This would make life a hell of a lot earlier for folks like myself. Also, > why the heck does the default install of freebsd 2.2.x and 3.x have perl4 as > the default perl instead of perl5? Everytime I do an upgrade it breaks my > setup.. Some of the reasons that have come up before include that perl4 is smaller and more stable than perl5, and that there is no maintainer for perl5 (still changing). Why not set NOPERL=true in your /etc/make.conf and/or adjust your paths accordingly so that /usr/local/bin/perl is used rather than /usr/bin/perl? -- Mike "...check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong." --Ayn Rand, _Atlas Shrugged_ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message