Eric Gillespie wrote: >> Even worse -- the subversion meta package insists on "building" Sun's >> JDK. Anyone have any luck installing that on a NetBSD/amd64 system? >> >> Subversion, Python, Ruby, et. al. Are extremly portable -- Java is >> not. I see no reason to disable the subversion meta package for all the >> non-i386 users out there. >> >> Subversion already uses the options framework -- wouldn't it make >> sense to add Java as an option which isn't enabled by default? > > devel/subversion is not some random subset of Subversion chosen > by the packager; it depends on all Subversion (well, all that > we've gotten around to packaging yet ;-> ; I think it's complete, > now that I've packaged javahl). If you want specific components, > install them separately. Maybe all you want is subversion-base. Let's look at it from an pkgsrc-view, rather than a single package. I'm using NetBSD/amd64. It's not an uncommon architecture/port. I would assume that the packages in pkgsrc would cater towards being cross platform (just a guess, extrapolated by the number of platforms pkgsrc supports, and all the work being put into patches to make it even more platform friendly), and being one who runs NetBSD/amd64, I assumed that meta packages which could easily be cross platform-friendly, without ruining it for everyone else, would be so. If it were up to me, highly non-portable dependencies would be disabled by default in pkgsrc through the options framework, and the documentation would specify that. You, and others, have suggested that I install subversion-base and the python plugin manually. Obviously, that's what I've had to revert to when I noticed that the builds broke. But that's not the point -- I could have downloaded it and built it myself if "getting an executable" was what I was getting at. The point is that locking out a large number of users from a meta package because of changes which are relevant to 0.1% of the users who can still use the meta package is a Bad Idea(tm). If Gnome and KDE incorporate some meaningless (for the vast majority of users) Java-program, do we break meta-pkgs/gnome and meta-pkgs/kde for all those users who can not get Java built on their systems? ..or could we at least wait until Sun has open sourced all of their java-stuff, and it has been imported into pkgsrc? Try seeing it from my perspective: I've never run into anything like this in pkgsrc before. Ihough it may seem minor change to you [the average i386 or sparc user, that is], to me it's a huge shift in priorities. -- Kind regards, Jan Danielsson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature