Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:26:45 +0200 From: Marcus von Appen <mva@FreeBSD.org> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: Florent Peterschmitt <fpeterscom@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Port system "problems" Message-ID: <20120626092645.Horde.HytQbVNNcXdP6WQ1aMtjoMA@webmail.df.eu> In-Reply-To: <20120626065732.GH41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <4FE8E4A4.9070507@gmail.com> <20120626065732.GH41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:22:28AM +0200, Florent Peterschmitt wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I'm not a developer and I know how it's difficult to make a port (or >> some ports, for example VirtualBox) but I think the port system has many >> "problems": >> >> 1. Ports are not modular > What do you mean by modular? if you are speaking about subpackages > it is coming, > but it takes time I hope, we are not talking about some Debian-like approach here (foo-bin, foo-dev, foo-doc, ....). >> 2. Option system is not really well documented > What kind of documentation do you need?, please report what you are > expected so > that we can improve it > >> 3. Some dependencies are totally useless > Please report PR > >> 4. So slow... > What is slow do you mean compiling is slow? > >> >> Let me give some examples: >> >> 1. games/wesnoth should be splitted in games/wesnoth-bin and >> games/wesnoth-datas. Why rebuild everything when just binaries needs ? > > This is coming, it takes lot of time, and some things have to be > done first, in > the infrastructure that the user do not see much. I do not see any necessity for infrastructure changes here - we did that in the past for several ports (e.g. alephone, alienarena, ...). >> 2. Why do we have to put WITH_NEW_XORG in /etc/make.conf to get it ? Why >> not put this var in a port configuration file which will be read by all >> ports needing this var ? > > Because this is not that easy, do you have a technical way to > propose? I think > noone is really happy with the WITH_NEW_XORG, but this is the "less worse" :) > way we found, if you have a better way to propose, please step up > and propose. /etc/make.conf (or whatever to be included in /etc/make.conf) can be seen as port configuration file that is evaluated by the ports. And each port picks those things, it needs. Cheers Marcus
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120626092645.Horde.HytQbVNNcXdP6WQ1aMtjoMA>