Subject: Re: mplayer & qt?
To: Martin S. Weber <Ephaeton@gmx.net>
From: Eric Radman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/18/2006 16:46:47
On 22:22 Mon 18 Sep , Martin S. Weber wrote:
> Can't the gnome (meta)package depend on gmplayer which builds 'mplayer' with
> the 'suiting' options for "gnome" ?
> Can't the pure mplayer package build the minimal, functional requirements???
> I'd very much like to see a "minimal" mplayer package.
That could be said for a lot of packages. I would love to see a -minimal
option for many ports.
For example, if I want the GTK library for OCaml I have to build 93
packages! Holy cow. This includes stuff like python, openldap-client,
This is really a problem on older platforms not just because of built
time, but because it often results in a port that won't compile because
of one or two extraneous dependancies.
The OpenBSD ports team has generally done a great job at minimizing the
number of packages required to build a given port, but it's hard to
compare because they don't have to deal with any portability issues
relating to use on various operating systems.
Eric Radman | http://eradman.com