> What I think we really need is some way to easily porti-ze useful stuff > that would otherwise go into /usr/[s]bin, so adding things would be just as > easy as hooking up SUBDIR into usr.[s]bin/Makefile. Yes, I know, this is > topic almost as old as the FreeBSD Project itself, but perhaps we just did > not approach it the right way. It was always the idea that we would just > move bunch of stuff from src/usr.[s]bin repo into ports/. Which brings > several important question such as "who is to host the distfile"? "where > sources hosted", "who is to update the port when changes happen?" etc. > > Perhaps even by forking the whole ports idea into a smaller closely-guarged > subset. Something like a new baseports repository, which might have > structure like baseports/usr.bin/xxx, baseports/usr.sbin/yyy etc. Then add > some automagic glue to kick in on every commit and transfer this into valid > ports, which is going to be packaged by the poudriere and such. This way we > could reduce amount of port-foo average src committer needs in order to > maintain code. I am almost tempted to sit and write something over the next > weekend or few of thereofs. Using usr.sbin/trim as an example.
Couldnt the "distribution" just live as files commited into the ports tree as a "work" hierarcy and the top level file be marked as no fetch. We use to stick small stuff in ports by putting there files in files/ and having that work IIRC. I really really dislike the idea of putting stuff from base in external repositories and then fetching them, something just feels fundementally wrong about that. > -Max > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 12:47 PM Cy Schubert <cy.schub...@cschubert.com> > wrote: > > > In message <cag6cvpx78rhmtwtm97we50qy_d2jx79upn-9tjmy90czeyv...@mail.gma > > il.com> > > , Conrad Meyer writes: > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 12:22 PM Cy Schubert <cy.schub...@cschubert.com> > > wrot > > > e: > > > > This is wrong. IIRC there was discussion that this should be in dd(1). > > > > Why not submit a revision to add the functionality to dd? > > > > > > Well, it's wrong, but not because we need another weird dd mode. dd > > > is hard enough to use already. > > > > I've never found dd confusing. What's wrong conv=erase? > > > > If it must stay, sderase is a better name. That's really what it does. > > > > Ports maybe? > > > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > Cy Schubert <cy.schub...@cschubert.com> > > FreeBSD UNIX: <c...@freebsd.org> Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org > > > > The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few. > > > > > > > > -- Rod Grimes rgri...@freebsd.org _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
