Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 12:59:05 +0400 From: Boris Samorodov <bsam@ipt.ru> To: wahjava@gmail.com (Ashish SHUKLA) Cc: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: split xcbgen from xcb-proto Message-ID: <35489942@bb.ipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <86hbzwvzsd.fsf@chateau.d.lf> (Ashish SHUKLA's message of "Fri\, 08 May 2009 12\:36\:58 %2B0530") References: <4A01C995.1080808@icyb.net.ua> <86hbzwvzsd.fsf@chateau.d.lf>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 08 May 2009 12:36:58 +0530 Ashish SHUKLA wrote: > Andriy Gapon writes: > > It seems that it is a kind of bloating to require python with X (even if only a > > small portion of it is needed). Unfortunately upstream guys maintain xcb-proto and > > xcbgen in the same distribution. But a trend among packgers seem to be to split > > these two into separate packages. I wonder if anybody is working on the same for > > our ports. > I don't think splitting into two ports will be a good idea. Instead I > recommend using the PYTHON knob to install python stuff if user requires > it. It's a good idea for those who uses ports but not packages. > > From the point of view of the port itself it seems to be as easy building only one > > subdirectory of the project, e.g.: > > http://cvsweb.se.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/bsdweb.cgi/pkgsrc/x11/xcb-proto/patches/patch-ae?rev=1.1 > > But it seems to be a more challenging task to decide which "higher level" ports > > should depend on xcb-proto alone and which need xcbgen too. > Yes, thats a challenging task. If more people require this, then I can > add a PYTHON option to the xcb-proto to build/skip python related stuff in > xcb-proto package. WBR -- Boris Samorodov (bsam) Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet SP FreeBSD Committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?35489942>