RW wrote:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:55:02 -0500
Chuck Robey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are you seriously saying that a decision regarding what ports are to
be installed should be made after they are installed? If you have
10,000 ports installed, you obviously have no need whatever to make
any decision at all. Whether or not they are outdated is utterly
irrelevant, because if they're installed, it may be inferred that you
wanted them. It's the decision whether to install them or not that
we're talking about.
What you don't appear to understand is that the Option Framework allows
a user to recursively set options for ports *before* they are installed.
So to configure the whole of Gnome, you can simply do this:
# cd /usr/port/x11/gnome2 && make config-recursive
The reason I mentioned the script is that upgrades are the only part of
the process that isn't directly supported by the ports system, you need
something to catch the ports that have changed options, or you may
waste time. This requires a script, but new installs are completely
trivial.
I've already deleted the message that kicked me off, but it looked to me
that you were talking about the 10,000 ports I was talking about, and
that meant you were referring to new installs, not upgrades. If it were
me, I would think that upgrades should probably follow the same path as
the original install, no? In some small number of cases, there would be
brand new options that would not be possible to predict from the
decisions already taken for the orignal system, but that would be the
exception, not the rule.
Regardless, as an unintended side effect of the system I'm talking
about, such items would be automatically taken care of. The only
recurring task would be, as new options find themselves required, users
would be asked to register the setting for a new keyword. This would
probably mean something on the order of maybe one or two new words a
month to decide on, something that would hardly be a worry.
I do agree, the system I'm talking about, if I was trying to justify it
only on the basis of upgrades alone, would not be justified. Sort of
like the tail wagging the dog, too much work for too little gain, but as
a nice side effect, it's acceptable.
BUT if you were talking only about upgrades, then I kinda think,
personally, that you probably should instantiated a new thread, not used
this one. Hmm?
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
