Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 26 Dec 2013 12:45:12 +0100
From:      Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
To:        clutton <clutton@zoho.com>
Cc:        Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: shells/bash-static fails to package/deinstall cleanly
Message-ID:  <20131226114512.GI40122@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
In-Reply-To: <1388057262.3771.78.camel@eva02.mbsd>
References:  <52BBC768.6010702@dougbarton.us> <1388043634.3771.31.camel@eva02.mbsd> <52BBE04D.4060708@dougbarton.us> <1388046987.3771.36.camel@eva02.mbsd> <1388051565.3771.59.camel@eva02.mbsd> <1388054443.3771.66.camel@eva02.mbsd> <52BC0A18.1080503@FreeBSD.org> <1388057262.3771.78.camel@eva02.mbsd>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--h22Fi9ANawrtbNPX
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 01:27:42PM +0200, clutton wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-12-26 at 10:51 +0000, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> > On 26/12/2013 10:40, clutton wrote:
> > > The whole port because of STATIC option?
> > > It'll be better to move this thing to bash port and make it as an
> > > option. Like zsh maintainer did.
> >=20
> > It's already an option in the bash port.
> >=20
> > You seem somewhat unclear on the concept of slave ports and why they
> > should exist.  The point here is so that users of binary packages can
> > jut type
> >=20
> >    pkg install bash-static
> >=20
> > and get a statically linked version of bash.  This is the principal
> > reason that slave ports exist: so that the same software will be built
> > with different sets of default options, either for end user convenience
> > or because some other port depends on having some specific combination
> > of options.
> >=20
> > 	Cheers,
> >=20
> > 	Matthew
> >=20
>=20
> I know why, I mean I understand the purpose.
>=20
> http://www.mail-archive.com/freebsd-ports@freebsd.org/msg52457.html
>=20
> I thought that after OPTIONS framework was introduced all -x11 and
> similar ports are legacy. Am I wrong?
>=20
Not yet the OPTIONS framework is just the first step, the second step is ki=
lling
pkg_install and the last step bringing in subpackages/flavours :)

regards,
Bapt

--h22Fi9ANawrtbNPX
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAlK8FsgACgkQ8kTtMUmk6ExT/QCfVS5WJRxtSmRh01m8COz6vxcf
EYEAoJxDyegtLBTP9TwCYXHJUDHoyGu7
=GZnM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--h22Fi9ANawrtbNPX--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131226114512.GI40122>