split xcbgen from xcb-proto

Andriy Gapon avg at icyb.net.ua
Fri May 8 13:17:47 UTC 2009


on 08/05/2009 14:35 Ashish SHUKLA said the following:

> Well no ideas about netbsd's pkgsrc system, but debian is a package
> based system. Being a package based system, you've to create a separate
> package for each combination of options you're going to support. IMHO,
> FreeBSD is not a package based system primarily.

Well, let's not make decisions for other people. It's great to have a combined
ports/packages system and it's nice to always treat it as such.

> It is ports based and
> in ports based system you've the freedom to specify the OPTIONS with
> which you want port to be installed and a package to be built for it.

Freedom always comes with burden of choice. I don't see why in this case there
should be any choice or why that choice should be on a user.
Select PYTHON and a user might have a bloat that he actually doesn't; don't select
PYTHON, then later install some port that depends on xcbgen and a user has to deal
with a cryptic failure when the new port sees that xcb-proto is installed, but
doesn't see xcbgen.

Having two ports, one for xcb-proto C core and the other for xcbgen doesn't but
any burden on a user and automatically correctly handles dependencies.
But this approach is more laborious, of course.

> And BtW, WITH_PYTHON is not defined by default which means the default
> port will not be built with python support, unless you specifically
> requests for it. If this seems okay to you, I can add OPTIONS.


-- 
Andriy Gapon


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list