[HEADUP] FLAVORS landing.

[Chris H]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 21:24:22 +0800 Julian Elischer <julian at freebsd.org> wrote

> On 27/9/17 8:17 pm, Stefan Esser wrote:
> > Am 27.09.17 um 13:52 schrieb Julian Elischer:
> >> On 27/9/17 4:20 pm, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> >>
> >> Before this gets too far down the road I would like to suggest that we
> >> quickly formalise some nomenclature
> >> or we will have 200 different ideas as to how to do the same thing;
> >>
> >> I would like to propose the following possible "examples of official"
> >> flavours:
> >> -nodocs         ..  nearly every port has a DOCS option..  a way
to
> >> automatically turn it off globally and generate said pkgs would be good.
> >> -minimal ..  smallest possible feature set.. probably used just to
> >> satisfy some stupid dependency.
> >> -kitchensink    ..  speaks for itself .. options lit up like a
christmas
> >> tree
> >> -runtime        ..  no .a files, include files, development
> >> documentation or sources ..
> >>                      might only contain a single
libxx.so.N file, or a
> >> single binary executable.
> > No, these are no good examples for flavours, as I understand them ...
> why not?
> 
> that's part of the problem here. It's not really defined..
> sub packages?  flavours?  what's the difference?
> It's not defined and a dozen examples would go a long way to help.
> I know what I want..  that's to be able to populate my appliance 
> without all the stuff I don't need.
> I also have a different requirement for my application build 
> environment.  There I need all the includes etc.
> How I get there is still a mystery.
If I choose licorice flavor. Do I still get to choose between
red, or black. If not, I'd like to request that black be the
one chosen.
IOW I see your point. I'm not really sure FLAVOR(S) are ready
to land, just yet.

Thanks for bringing this point up, Julian. :)

--Chris
> 
> >
> > These are possible typical sub-package categories, or rather you could
> > remove the DOCS from the base port, but offer a sub-package for them.
> >
> >
> > I'd rather think that NO-X11 might become a typical flavour, or the
> > dependency on a particular crypto library (e.g. openssl vs. libressl).
> >
> >
> > Regards, STefan
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"