Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 06:54:42 +0300 From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@ciam.ru> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Call for feedback on a Ports-collection change Message-ID: <3FFE2602.3000105@ciam.ru> In-Reply-To: <p0602043abc23baee469f@[128.113.24.47]> References: <p0602041abc1660a416d0@[128.113.24.47]> <200401090233.51499.max@love2party.net> <p0602043abc23baee469f@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 2:33 AM +0100 1/9/04, Max Laier wrote: > >> On Friday 09 January 2004 01:49, Garance A Drosihn wrote: >> >>> Especially as disks get ever-larger, I think we're >>> better off with fewer-but-larger files, instead of a larger >>> number of tiny files. As a port maintainer I'd like to say. It will harder to support. Much harder. >> 2) Changes are much harder to track: > > > On the contrary, changes should be *easier* to track. All the > information for any given port will be in two files. This will > not be true for all ports (particularly for ports which have a > lot of patch files). Let's image a situation: port has changed. What is chaneged? Let's see in WebCVS. Does distfile has changed? If yes, I know tarball has changed. pkg-plist has changed? I know a files structure has changed. I got this information even without opening this files. I'll open only Makefile to see a changes in it. It may be much harder to look at a big diff instead. > >> 3) It will get harder to create ports: > > > I really do not expect this to happen -- particularly since > the simple-program will know how to find the appropriate > information for EITHER old-style or new-style ports. Thus, > it CANNOT be harder to do than it is now, because someone > can just do exactly what they do now and the makefiles will > handle it all. How I create a port? I create a Makefile, pkg-descr, run make makesum, write pkg-plist with a files structure. It's logicaly separated: make logic, port description, distfiles info, files structure. You gave an example for pkg-comment. But this one-line file IMHO really was useless. Collapsing distfile, pkg-desc and pkg-plist will mix comprehension. Even separated pkg-install and pkg-deinstall has a logic: pkg-install will run only when you install a package not a port. pkg-deistall will run always you deinstall the port. And I absolutely object against of collapsing patch files. When patch files number grew more then five, I've renamed them from patch-0n in patch-WHERE_PLACED::FILE_NAME because I began to tangle them. But if it will one file I have no idea how can I change one of them easy. --- Sem.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3FFE2602.3000105>