pkgsrc-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Dependency hell, again

Magnus Eriksson <> writes:

> On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Julio Merino wrote:
>> Have two packages:
> ...
>> This is binary-friendly because repositories will have two different
>> packages that users will be able to choose from.  With package
>> options, it's not possible.
> But isn't that just a limitation of the way bulk builds are done now?
> I don't see any fundamental issues that would prevent a package build
> being called twice with different options, in theory.  (Or having two
> "metapackages", where each just sets PKG_OPTIONS and then builds a
> common "actual" package.  Or something.)
> And I could still build from source with any combination I want.

The big issues are

  options are not encoded into the package name

  when one turns off something globally, then some packages stop
  depending on it.  That's easy.  But, it also means that say for global
  "-samba" (to pick my favorite thing to turn off) A built with -samba
  should not only depend on samba but also depend on B:-samba instead of

So basically:

  options are great when building from source because there is the full

  Building the entire set of options seems like a huge amount of
  building.  But we could perhaps define the sets to build in the
  makefile so common cases are built

  there is some notion of pulling out major choices when the populace is
  split into separate packages (like dasher and gnome).  This is a
  compromise betwen work and flexibility

Attachment: pgpMb1pZi4du1.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index