Summary: | bad defaults used in many cases | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | Julian Elischer <julian> |
Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | freebsd-ports-bugs (Nobody) <ports-bugs> |
Status: | Closed FIXED | ||
Severity: | Affects Many People | CC: | adamw |
Priority: | --- | ||
Version: | Latest | ||
Hardware: | Any | ||
OS: | Any |
Description
Julian Elischer
![]() ![]() You're absolutely correct, Julian. The dependency chain of many ports borders on the absurd, stemming largely from the desire for each port to be everything, to everyone. I have the same problem with the vim port, which, because I don't want to DROP support for anything in the default package, vim depends on nearly 200 ports just to build, and dozens to install. It is anticipated that this will be mitigated to a great deal by the upcoming flavours paradigm. This will enable much more reasonable packages to be the default, and making creating "full" editions much easier. I think we can all agree that "start reasonable and work your way UP to ludicrous" is a better target than "start ludicrous just in case." Do you have a better paradigm in mind for the meantime? The split between ports and packages is causing me some problems. Some fixes for package issues will require changes to ports and yet they are different 'doamains'. We need to decide whether packages and ports are one unified thing or not. the flavours thing sounds fine but where can I find out more about it? drop this.. others are working on the issue with flavours |