* Matt Van Mater [2005-09-21]:
> I understand what is required to make this work and that it is quite
> easy to do.  However I think this isn't the right way to manage and
> distribute packages.

pkg_add will sooner or later try to find a ports tree and build missing
packages.
 
> I imagine that espie and/or theo run a script against the ports tree
> during the release cycle to automatically compile any port that has a
> line matching "PERMIT_PACKAGE_FTP=YES".  That's why I think it might

No, we do bulk builds of the *complete* ports tree. We carefully choose
a subset of the packages, that are permitted to go onto the cds and
verify these packages are dependency complete and don't show any
conflict.

We just put all packages onto the ftp mirrors that we are permitted to.

> be nice to have a notice during verbose installation that notifies the
> user of any dependencies that are not allowed on the FTP and/or CD.

That doesn't make sense, just because a package is not on an ftp server
does not mean it's not permitted to be there. I have packages on my
internal ftp server at home, I don't care about PERMIT_* there. So a
missing package there just means I didn't build it.
 
> Just my .02 about adding a little user friendliness

One could argue that restricitve PERMIT_PACKAGE_* should propagate up
the dependency tree, so that packages like clamav do not show up on ftp
servers at all. But then we'd have people ask why we don't put clamav
onto the mirrors. So the best solution would be to write OpenArc, make a
port and let clamav depend on that instead. :)

Nikolay

Reply via email to