On Fri Oct 29, 2021 at 04:03:00PM +0200, Frederic Cambus wrote: > On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 07:20:00AM +0200, Rafael Sadowski wrote: > > > I could imagine the time is right, so soon after the release. I would > > like to import initial wayland ports and thus also a new category > > "wayland". > > > > I realise that it will take time for wayland to work, but that is not > > important for now. > > > > Example: x11/kde-applications/spectacle > > > > Spectacle needs kwayland/qtwayland as a strong dependency (I can build > > this) to be able to take screenshots under either X11 or wayland. Means > > it is not needed at runtime but we can update it. (Currently stuck at a > > very old version). > > > > Does this make sense to you? Is a new category OK for you? > > > > I would be very happy to receive feedback from all porters. > > Thanks for looking into this. > > I think it would make sense to import them if it makes your work on > KDE easier. Also, being proactive regarding Wayland will allow to start > upstreaming patches and ensure it at least keeps building on OpenBSD, > so I view this as a good thing.
Thanks for the feedback. > > The potential downsides I see is that those packages might be auto- > detected at configure time by some of our existing ports, and some ports > might need to be adjusted. Good point. > > Another question is how much time this will > be adding to bulk builds, could you give some information about how long > it takes to build those packages on your machine? The whole Wayland category is quit small and builds really quickly. I was surprised myself how slim the whole thing is. It's pure C without heavy C++. Of course QtWayland/KWayland is a different story but even that is okay and that is my problem ;) > > No strong opinion regarding adding a new category, I noticed the other > BSDs didn't seem to create a new category but this doesn't mean we > shouldn't do it. I think x11 and other categories will benefit form it in the long term. Rafael
