ports vs packages

[Peter]

> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Dick Hoogendijk <dick at nagual.nl> wrote:
>> Op 10-1-2012 12:36, Eric Masson schreef:
>>
>>> Dick Hoogendijk<dick at nagual.nl>  writes:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> As I write in another reply: that's true and totally stupid imo.
>>>
>>> *You* think it's stupid.
>>
>> Yes, as I wrote: "stupid imo"
>> But thanks again for your reply. You may be right but I still feel it's
>> better to *have* the pache module and disable it than to *have to* use
>> ports
>> just to get it.
>>
>
> IMO it's stupid as well and I second Dick's opinion. The module
> doesn't hurt anyone, and reduces confusion. I think that PHP is still
> more heavily deployed on mod_php than on anything else. The Apache
> module should be built by default unless there is a really strong
> argument as to why it shouldn't.
>
> --
> Alejandro Imass


When I do pkg_add -r php I'm supposed to install apache as a dependency to
that package ?  Then people will ask why apache and all its glory is
installed and we'll be back to this same argument but in reverse.

]Peter[
  All my stuff runs on 'cheap' hardware, so I build most items, removing
crud I don't need and will never use. [portmaster, list all the
dependencies, then do 'pkg_add' on the ones I made no change in
'make-config']. Lean mean serving machine vs. everything and the kitchen
sink all purpose serving machine.