Option vs. flavor?

[Adam Weinberger]

> 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