On 2016-10-11 20:59, Julian Elischer wrote:
are unsuitable for some situations. We really need to follow the lead
of some of the Linux groups and have -runtime and -devel versions of
packages, OR we what woudlbe smarter, woudl be to have several "sub
manifests" to allow unpacking in different environments.
Is as adding a "HEADERS" or whatever you want to call the option to
ports, a solution? Like we have DOC for documentation, an option that
could be PLIST sub'd and switch installation of include/whatever.h and
Yes it's a ton of work requiring to go through many ports, but looking
at a random sample, it could be scripted and manual labor reduced.
To me something like this sounds very much consistent what other
options, like DOC and MANPAGES, already do. And with individual options
you don't presume package roles like -dev or -runtime or -whatever and
you can combine as you want them.
And eventually if, hopefully when, package variants are implemented,
maybe the official pkg repo can include all the variants, but then, I
think, that's only a matter of logistics and resource available to build
all those combinations and store them. But the basic mechanism for it
should be a port option, imho.
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"