On, Wed Sep 03, 2014, Bryan Drewery wrote: [...] > I really dislike plists as they are today. The argument that having them > makes it easy to see what the port installs is bogus. Many don't have > pkg-plist because they have PLIST_* or INFO or are missing DOCS/EXAMPLES > due to usage of *. Many, such as rubygems and python, have autoplist > already. I would like to provide 1 approved way to do autoplist, rather > than having the dozens of different implementations that we have today > in ports.
[...]
> I understand there is fear involved with not having a plist validate
> everything. Consider that many other package systems do not require a
> plist to start.
[...]
Seconded. In my opinion for 95% of all cases it sums up to: everything in the
staging directory gets installed. We can use post-build or pre-install to
clean up the staging directory where necessary, or even revert the plist
meaning in the worst case, e.g. everything in ${EXCLUDE_INSTALL} is not to be
installed, if necessary.
It'd greatly reduce the maintenance efforts and ugly hacks (look at python.mk
for an example) to work around the limitations of plist and upstream
solutions.
Cheers
Marcus
pgp9yJ1dqj0i6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
