On Jan 22, 2009, at 5:15 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Jan 21, 2009, at 05:00, Scott Haneda wrote:
List it in the port description? Will that get searched? How do
I even
get a list of what is in these packages from the CPAN site?
Seems an ok way to deal with it, not ideal to me though. I am not
sure if this problem is just perl module related, or is more
generic. If it would be appropriate, the idea of adding a new
variable to port files may be a fair idea.
file_contains or whatever is appropriate, which could then be
searched on by default. It seems very common that this comes up.
Please no new variable. It uglies up the port. When reading the
portfile, I want to be able to concentrate on reading the portfile,
not wading through a list of files I don't care about. The ncursesw
portfile is currently 38 lines long but it installs 3311 files; I
don't want the portfile to grow 3311 lines longer.
Is there any official guidance on this matter? I am making perl
module ports, and I generally go to CPAN, copy the title, and use that
as the short desc, and for the long desc, I use their main
description. This can be long at times, is that not recommended?
Also, knowing that Net::SMTP is with the base perl5.8 port is
something I
just knew because it's part of the perl libnet stuff which was
integrated
into perl core some time ago.
[snip]
The question of "How does a new user know that Net::SMTP is part of
the base?" is a problem.
A MacPorts *user* does not need to know that; they just need to know
what port they ultimately want to install, and install it.
And I think I am a good case in which that sort of failed me. I needed
Net::SMTP, but to me, as a user, it was not there. I tried port list
p5-net-smtp, and nothing.
This brings up a point, why was the naming convention changed? It
took me a while to even learn to prepend p5 and convert :: to -
Next, I tried `port search p5-net-smtp*` and I beleive, I got back p5-
net-smtp-auth or close to it. So still no match. Try as I might, I
could not locate it, so I made my own portfile. It was then, I found
out, it was included in another higher up module.
For some reason, I skipped looking for that module, and tried to make
a port for it, only to learn it was there. Good to learn it was there,
so I could not take any more time on that one.
But, your statement of "... *user* does not need to know that ... "
does not ring entirely true for me. I had a list of modules I needed,
90% of them did not immediately appear to be available. In the end,
about 50% of them were, but it was hard to locate them.
What if every perl module had a port file, and all it was was a port
file that had a dependency back to the parent module that it is a part
of? Then search would find what it needed to, other port files would
not get dirty with lists of included modules.
A MacPorts *maintainer* (of perl modules) does perhaps need to know
that. But I think it's a matter of knowing your corner of the world.
If you're interested in writing perl modules, you need to know a few
things about perl, like that it includes a small number of modules;
once you know that, you can use "port contents perl5.8" to see what
modules are included.
I understand now, though I am still not sure I agree. I can manage,
and don't get me wrong, I love this system and really commend you guys
on your mailing list support, so I am not complaining at all.
This probably only applies to perl modules, and maybe some php modules
or ruby gems. At any rate, if I need foo::bar::baz I should be able
to `port search p5-foo-bar-baz` and get something in the case it is
part of some larger module package.
I would really like to know the history of why I can not `port install
foo::bar::baz if even only an internal remap to use the standard ::
notation. Is this a tcl collision of some sort?
I sort of like the idea of a port file being a pointer to download
some other package that contains the parent modules, unless someone
tells me it is a really bad idea.
Thanks for the dialogue.
--
Scott
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
