Installing & recording of optional software

[Ion-Mihai Tetcu]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 18:19:50 -0500
Parv <parv at pair.com> wrote:

> Recently i had submitted databases/p5-DBIx-Simple port which can
> optionally use other software to provide extra functionality.  Let's
> use databases/p5-SQL-Abstract as an example of this extra
> functionality.  Currently, DBIx-Simple port records SQL-Abstract as
> runtime dependency if WITH_SQL_ABSTRACT is defined.
> 
> In order to use DBIx-Simple, SQL-Abstract port does not need to
> preexist during or after the install of DBIx-Simple.  It is just
> that SQL-Abstract functionality will not be available until
> SQL-Abstract is installed.
> 
> What i am trying to say is for DBIx-Simple port, IMO, recording of
> SQL-Abstract as runtime dependency is wrong, and i need a better way
> to inform the user that DBIx-Simple can use SQL-Abstract and install
> the optional port if indicated so via WITH_SQL_ABSTRACT or some such
> variable.

If I, the user, define the optional WITH_FOO because I want to have
that functionality then, for me, the port RUN_DEPENDS on FOO. I don't
see your problem here; eventually convert the port to OPTIONS and try
to squeeze an explanation of what using FOO in the option description.
 
> Alternatively, only a message can be printed -- w/o installing any
> optional software -- telling the user that DBIx-Simple can use
> other software & they themselves need install it separately.

Please don't do this for at least this three reasons:
- for me the port depends on FOO
- it would take longer to install separate ports
- tools like pkg_cutleaves need a way to know FOO is used (if we would
be talking about BUILD_DEPENDS, even optional, then this approach would
also brake portupgrade and equivalent tools)


-- 
IOnut - Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
  "Intellectual Property" is   nowhere near as valuable   as "Intellect"

BOFH excuse #87:
Password is too complex to decrypt