harder and harder to avoid pkg

Vlad K. vlad-fbsd at acheronmedia.com
Wed Oct 12 08:13:42 UTC 2016

On 2016-10-11 20:59, Julian Elischer wrote:
> are unsuitable for some situations.  We really need to follow the lead
> of some of the Linux groups and have -runtime and -devel versions of
> packages,  OR  we what woudlbe smarter, woudl be to have several "sub
> manifests" to allow unpacking in different environments.

Is as adding a "HEADERS" or whatever you want to call the option to 
ports, a solution? Like we have DOC for documentation, an option that 
could be PLIST sub'd and switch installation of include/whatever.h and 

Yes it's a ton of work requiring to go through many ports, but looking 
at a random sample, it could be scripted and manual labor reduced.

To me something like this sounds very much consistent what other 
options, like DOC and MANPAGES, already do. And with individual options 
you don't presume package roles like -dev or -runtime or -whatever and 
you can combine as you want them.

And eventually if, hopefully when, package variants are implemented, 
maybe the official pkg repo can include all the variants, but then, I 
think, that's only a matter of logistics and resource available to build 
all those combinations and store them. But the basic mechanism for it 
should be a port option, imho.


Vlad K.

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list