Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 08:20:18 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/emulators/wine Makefile distinfo pkg-plist ports/emulators/wine/files patch-dlls-wineoss.drv Message-ID: <20110514082018.GC97304@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201105140021.p4E0LlP7029193@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <201105140021.p4E0LlP7029193@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 12:21:47AM +0000, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > gerald 2011-05-14 00:21:47 UTC > > Modified files: > emulators/wine Makefile distinfo pkg-plist > emulators/wine/files patch-dlls-wineoss.drv > Log: > Update to Wine 1.3.20. This includes the following changes: [...] > > Only tentatively remove $DATADIR/wine upon deinstallation to allow for > the forthcoming wine-gecko port. [1] I've read your reasoning in the PR about the separate gecko-enabled port, and while I am generally not very happy about the idea of sub-ports, I have to say that it makes sense when slave or sibling ports carry substantial amount of extra functionality, heavy dependencies, or features that are useful to minority of users. In case of wine-gecko, however, making separate port I think is overkill. It's just a single .cab file, worth couple of megs, and most users want it anyways. I believe OPTION (default to on) is better suited and just will DTRT here. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110514082018.GC97304>