[CHANGE PROPOSAL] Moving WWW from pkg-descr to Makefile

Baptiste Daroussin bapt at FreeBSD.org
Sat Oct 6 08:04:12 UTC 2012

On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 07:07:49PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 10/05/2012 07:05 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I want to propose and make the actual move of the WWW information from the
> > pkg-descr to the Makefile itself via a WWW variable.
> > 
> > doing this will have multiple benefits:
> >  * consistency all metadata bug this one are in Makefile
> ... except for the distinfo data.
> >  * speedup make describe avoiding using grep to get the informations (make
> >    describe itself does not need speed but make index heavily use it and this
> >    will definitly benefit from speed up)
> Agreed, but there are other ways to speed up 'make describe,' and tools
> like ports-mgmt/p5-FreeBSD-Portindex are a much better solution where
> "create an up to date INDEX quickly" is a real need.

This sounds like: we have a problem, instead of fixing it let's workaround it

> >  * Third party tool will be able to probe the information more easily.
> Portmaster doesn't parse WWW for anything, but I have suggested to
> others in the past that 'while read' in sh is a faster method of finding
> the WWW than grep. In fact, 'make describe' uses this method now, not
> grep. I vaguely recall that this was done at my suggestion, but I'm too
> lazy to trace the commit path to confirm it. :) 'make www-site' (which
> already exists in case there is a 3rd party tool that needs it) uses a
> different method utilizing awk. I haven't tested which one is faster.
> I'm also concerned about the proliferation of things being jammed into
> the ports Makefile (and coincidentally, bpm). I've noticed that just
> about every operation that portmaster does using 'make -V' has gotten
> noticeably slower over the last 6-8 months, and the trend seems to be
> getting worse instead of better.

make www-site already exists and will be made faster, and nothing else will be
added, but things will be removed... I don't see the proliferation here but
rather a cleanup.

Concerning the bpm, I have removed more old things and useless tests from it
that I have added! and if people were actively working on switching there ports
to the new option framework then the fallback code could be removed and this
will speed up lots of operations.

> > Do anyone have any concern about this?
> For all these reasons, and for the already-stated reason that it
> severely lowers the value of 'cat pkg-descr' (which I do quite often,
> and I'm sure other users do as well) I think this is a bad idea.
> Doug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20121006/a448b28f/attachment.pgp

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list