Option vs. flavor?
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
Sun Dec 17 14:32:22 UTC 2017
> On 17 Dec, 2017, at 1:48, Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/16/17 22:06, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>> Is the port of any use without the data file? If everybody who uses the
>> port needs the data file, I wouldn't make it an option at all. The
>> precedent is that ports with huge data files are marked NO_PACKAGE, so
>> there's no impact on the package builders. Make it non-optional, mark it
>> as NO_PACKAGE, and then the port works for all users.
>>
>> If, however, the port IS real-world usable without the data files, I'd
>> turn the data file into a second port. That way, package people can very
>> easily install the NO_BUILD slave and still install the main program by
>> pkg.
>
>
> Hi Adam,
>
>
> It is usable without data. Portions of the data are recommended to be
> downloaded into the specific directory for particular functions. Of
> course, it's more convenient to just a have all of it installed, and
> users will need all of it for all functions.
>
> This is the large physics package called Geant4 for simulation of the
> passage of particles through matter. https://reviews.freebsd.org/D13504
Ah okay. Then I'd say, make a slave port that just
fetches/extracts/installs the data files, and an option in the Geant4
master port that defaults to off. Set the slave port to NO_PACKAGE.
I wouldn't go the flavor route, because the purpose of flavors is to
generate multiple packages. The 4.5GB data files shouldn't have a package,
so options is the way to go.
# Adam
--
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
http://www.adamw.org
More information about the freebsd-ports
mailing list