ports structure and improvement suggestions

[Jeremy Messenger]

On Mon, 08 May 2006 16:38:19 -0500, Sideris Michael <msid at daemons.gr>  
wrote:

> On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 11:24:51PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
<snip>
>> Also, I'd like to see all the known bugs in OPTIONS fixed, before we
>> impose it on all the people.
>
> Of course they are not going to convert automagically, but if people are  
> never willing to
> convert them, then they will never convert.

Pav is right, it's one of reason I refused to convert any of my ports to  
use OPTIONS. Also, the OPTIONS has some limited. I don't like to be  
downgrade and limited by default. Once, all of known bugs are fixed and  
get a lot better then I shall accept the convert. The truth is that I  
always and still think that OPTIONS doesn't solve anything.

As for improvement suggest, I always want our ports tree to merge two  
prefixes (LOCALBASE/X11BASE) into a prefix. It's a big task.

A bit OT: I have wrote cports.sh[1] that will running portlint on all  
ports that maintain by same person. I am hoping to clean up all of gnome@  
ports when I am finishing w/ my final lab/exam on this week  
(Tuesday/Thursday).

[1] http://www.marcuscom.com:8080/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/portstools/cports.sh

Cheers,
Mezz

> Sideris Michael.


-- 
mezz7 at cox.net  -  mezz at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/  -  gnome at FreeBSD.org