Am 08.02.2014 11:29, schrieb Matthew Seaman: > Other than getting over the hump of implementing all this, will this > result in a massively increased workload for port maintainers? It > shouldn't. Essentially one port will now generate several sub-packages > instead of one package. This will be automatic: just dividing up the > files from staging into different pkg tarballs according to tags given > in pkg-plist. Tags which frequently already exist according to > OPTIONS_SUB. It also means that in a lot of cases we will be compiling > all the different optional parts of a port regularly, so problems with > obscure parts should come to light more quickly. Also the oft repeated > complaint that lang/php5 doesn't enable mod_php5 by default: that goes away.
Consider this a proposal: Will we optionally have an alternate way to mention separate pkg-plist files instead, or just use @package ... @closepackage markers instead of PLIST-SUB markup? I think that pkg-plist is already "decorated" beyond recognition for some ports with possibly three %%PLIST_SUB_TAG%% on one line. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
