It was a peachy Wednesday, Oct 2 2013, 21:46:01 when Stuart Henderson <st...@openbsd.org> wrote:
> On 2013/10/02 11:21, Ido Admon wrote: > > It was a peachy Wednesday, Oct 2 2013, 15:00:03, when Landry Breuil > > wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 02:36:44PM -0400, ido...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > ok here's a version with only one subpackage, the htmlviewer, > > > > and FULLPKGNAME > > > etc. \ > > > > i can't really get webkit to build atm, so i can't test much. > > > > > > I dont think stuart meant this, it was rather an issue with the > > > flavors handling. I think we need to keep those subpackages as > > > they are for dependency reasons, just fix the pkgnames for > > > flavoured builds. > > > > > > Landry > > > > well, since the bogofilter and the spamassasing don't have any > > LIB_DEPENDS, only RUN_DEPENDS, how about putting them in > > (another...) flavor? "spamfilters" maybe? > > IIRC quirks isn't enough to handle merging two old subpackages into > one new one. Rolling into the main package should work though > spamassassin is a fairly hefty set of dependencies, more than many > users would want I think. > > I would suggest keeping the original bogofilter/spamassassin > subpackages and just overwriting FULLPKGNAME/FULLPKGPATH.. > wouldn't they be in the main package if they're a FLAVOR?
