On 13/10/2016 5:42 AM, David Demelier wrote:
2016-10-12 10:04 GMT+02:00 Andrea Venturoli <m...@netfence.it>:
On 10/12/16 09:24, Matthieu Volat wrote:
And GNU/Linuxes can be a PITA when you have to track -dev(el) packages
(which sometimes really requires -bin, -app or whatever), or worst, describe
to people how they are supposed to build your software with weird subpackage
I really like that ports provides the software project as intended by
upstream (modulo options).
Just a "me too" here!
Could not agree more.
Please forget that idea.
I just hate having to install libfoo, libfoo-dev, libfoo-dbg,
libfoo-doc, libfoo-whatever each time I need to develop on Linux.
Please do not transform FreeBSD as a Linux distribution :)
I love the way FreeBSD and some very sparse Linux distributions
provide the packages exactly how it would be installed by hand (=
FreeBSD offers some options and very few changes for better
integration but packages are provided vanilla. You want a package? You
install /packagename/ nothing more, nothing less. I really would like
to see simple vanilla packages for the next 10 years.
The FreeBSD ports is already extremely complicated, do not make it
even harder :(
The suggestion is not for ports, but for packages..
a single package could be unpacked in 'runtime only' or 'everything' mode.
basically one package, two manifests. So no "foo-devel" or "foo-runtime"
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"