portsupgrade cvsup refuse file aware?
linimon at lonesome.com
Sun Mar 12 09:16:44 UTC 2006
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 07:02:00PM +1030, Aluminium Oxide wrote:
> I'm specifically focusing on international ports. If I keep a *complete*
> ports tree it's 5? 15? many times the size of a tree with ports for only
> 2 or three coutries or locales.
The last time I did a check of the inode count it showed that the
human-language-specific ports were less than 10 percent of the total.
If something has changed drastically, please cite some statistics that
> I have had no problems with ports with only one language set maintained
> as per refuse file restriction. So, what difference does it make?
You've been lucky. Most people are not so lucky.
Please go browse the INDEX file for a while and specifically look for
dependencies on the japanese/ ports. They are there, in the "base"
categories. Arguably, they shouldn't be, but until someone does the
work to move thing around so that they don't, and gets everyone to
agree that in the future we will restrict e.g. japanese/ ports to
not be dependencies of any other port than in japanese/, then it will
not be possible, in the general case, for all users, to drop the
I assert to you that this problem has been considered by many people,
in the past, many times, and the conclusion has always been that
the problem is much more complicated than it appears. It involves
both technical and political considerations. We are not trying to
be obstinate here, we are trying to convince you that you do not
sufficiently understand the problem.
More information about the freebsd-ports