From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Feb 19 6:42:14 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5593C37B401 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 06:42:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from pcwin002.win.tue.nl (pcwin002.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.72]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43B0943F75 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 06:42:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from stijn@pcwin002.win.tue.nl) Received: from pcwin002.win.tue.nl (orb_rules@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pcwin002.win.tue.nl (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h1JEgPVw097237; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 15:42:25 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from stijn@pcwin002.win.tue.nl) Received: (from stijn@localhost) by pcwin002.win.tue.nl (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h1JEgPJ6097236; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 15:42:25 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 15:42:25 +0100 From: Stijn Hoop To: Christian Weisgerber Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: passing arguments to *_DEPENDS Message-ID: <20030219144225.GE808@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> References: <20030219003422.GD31515@rot13.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Bright-Idea: Let's abolish HTML mail! Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 02:21:46PM +0000, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Ade Lovett wrote: >=20 > > An alternate, and also compatible view is to run a sweep through the po= rts > > tree, ensure that all such optional stuff is controlled by a WITH_* or > > WITHOUT_* variable (much needed standardization anyway), and then have > > +CONTENTS modified with a new @options:[=20 > > I believe we need to rethink the concept of ports either being thin (mi= nimal > > number of dependencies) or thick (maximal dependencies), and work on a > > generic optional-dependency system that individual ports may use. >=20 > OpenBSD's FLAVOR system, in short. That would rule. I've been meaning to look at porting OpenBSDs bsd.port.mk for quite some time but I haven't gotten around to it yet. Besides I suspect it will be very difficult. Anyone else been having a look at it? OpenBSD also has the IMHO pretty cool concept of separating package building from installing; that is, a port is just used to make a package instead of making the package from installed bits. That would also be a very nice feature to have. --Stijn --=20 Nostalgia ain't what it used to be. --xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+U5fRY3r/tLQmfWcRAuTuAJ0bt3iZyZ1500PyO67IRuQwN+DQPACeNGb3 rq4rREkZGSDaxiJ49ELFTG8= =d8cZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message