If we ever go that way, let's borrow the package set concept of Portage. Le 16 janv. 2010 à 19:56, Ryan Schmidt a écrit :
> > On Jan 16, 2010, at 10:25, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: > >>>> Have we considered bundling any packages with the MacPorts disk images >>>> that most packages use? >>> >>> No, I don't think we've considered that. What would be the benefit? Ports >>> aren't hard to compile the usual way... >> >> Example: if zlib is required by 90% of the ports we have, we should go ahead >> and bundle it with the installer. > >> I'm thinking zlib is likely to be one. > > Probably. zlib also doesn't change often, which would be good for this > application; if the dependency you bundle with MacPorts is updated often, > like say sqlite3, then bundling it is pointless, because the user will likely > be upgrading it right away anyway. > > But zlib is also small and only takes seconds to build. We don't have any > mechanism in place to allow ports to come pre-installed. I have a feeling it > would take more time and effort to create all that infrastructure than it > would save. > > _______________________________________________ > macports-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
