On 4/10/2016 11:38 PM, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
Le 05/10/2016 à 05:18, Julian Elischer a écrit :
On 3/10/2016 5:14 AM, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
Le 01/10/2016 à 04:35, Julian Elischer a écrit :
There is a need for a "minimum" install of a lot of packages.
Some dependencies are often optional, and can be unchecked by running
make config.
Such a 'minimum' install should probably be the default when coming in
as a dependency, as
there is an increasing tendency to configure things with all the bells
and whistles.
The bare minimum will never be the default. The default is what will
fit most people, so that they can use our packages out of the box.
I didn't say it should be the default, I said it should be an easy to
request option,
(without using the config screen on each of 25000 ports)
e.g. setting PORTS_CONFIG_MINIMUM before making everything.
Most ports and packages are installed not because people want them,
but because they are forced to do so by dependencies.
Giving a way to reduce the number of unrequested packages, in a simple
way would be of great use to many many people
Feel free to open PR/provide patches for ports which you think need to
provide more options.
I think it would be a framework change.
not so much a per-port change.
By default, when the variable is set you take the list of options for
the package, and set them all to 'unset'.
The only packages that would need work would be those for which that
is not a valid configuration, in which case you would supply some
precanned list of options to set to unset (or similar) e.g.
MIN_SETTINGS="bla foo bar"
the point is that if I'm including a port becuase it's just a prereq.
then I probably want almost no options set.. The port itself can
probably know what options are likely to be needed by things that need
it adn can possibly supply a sensible setting but if it doesn't it
might be possible to just do it automatically. It's ridiculous that a
single small port can pull in python, perl and TCL (I forget which it
was) along with some 40 or so other packages.
Another thing that might be good woudl be a way to tell ports "remove
all the ports that were just build dependencies".
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
