[clc-devel] Meta ports
simonerota at operamail.com
Sat Aug 30 17:26:28 UTC 2003
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 17:26:13 +0200
Johannes Winkelmann <jw at tks6.net> wrote:
> Hi there,
> Jürgen pointed out possible problems due to the fact that gtk2 is now in
> opt: Dependencies are not listed anymore. There are basically two ways
> out of this:
> - every ports mentions all dependencies of gtk2 itself
> - creating a meta port which lists the dependencies of gtk2; this port
> can be listed as dependency then, avoiding the above.
> It's pretty obvious that the second one is less error-prone and
> therefore our choice :-) Are there any comments or objections?
I support the second option too, with a couple of considerations:
1. The ideal solution would be to have dependencies listed also
in /base and /opt. I know we discussed the thing a hundred times
or so, but I'm still think that:
- This wouldn't undermine the "keep it simple" idea: standard pkgtools will simply ignore deps.
- It would be nice to have the same Pkgfile format for all ports.
Of course we can't force Per to change his mind about dependencies
in Pkgfile, anyway we (I?) could offer Per's an hand sending him
the opt and/or base ports with dependencies line included.
(just in case he's interested)
That could be a lot of work, but I think that it would be quite
a one-time effort, since /base and /opt collections are subjected
to less changes than ports in CLC.
2. If we go with metaports, I think we should define a standard
to handle such a thing. Ie: fake files to install, location
(as you pointed out in the PS). I suggest /usr/share/metaports
or something similar (just in case one would create a metaport
not strictly clc-related). Another think to consider is uninstall
behaviour: pkgrm gtk2-meta would not remove gtk2 itself?
If we have a good specification of metaports, these could
be very useful for installing certain group of packages,
let's say again kde or gnome. I've put up a page regarding metaports
some time ago at http://www.varlock.com. Unfortunately I've been
quite busy this summer, and I got some exam on September, so I
couldn't and can't play too much(at least for the moment)
with metaports and other projects.
I realize that I spent a lot of words for a small problem,
these are only suggestions in case other people too would
prefer to implement a complete metaport solution instead of
using metaports only as a quick-hack.
> Regards, Johannes
More information about the crux-devel