On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Lubomir Sedlacik wrote:

> > Is it okay if meta-packages that don't have any distfile and have any
> > empty PLIST have an additional CATEGORIES "meta-pkgs"?
> >
> > Is this okay for graphics/gimp?
> > -CATEGORIES=    graphics
> > +CATEGORIES=    graphics meta-pkgs
> >
> > And should any others like it (true metapackage, no distfile, no
> > PLIST), also add "meta-pkgs"?
>
> what's your intention with it?  you didn't say anything about the
> reasons behind it.

So someone can browse the meta-pkgs category on a website or FTP server
and quickly see all the meta-packages.

And so someone can quickly grep or look at the Makefiles and know that the
package is a meta-package. (And maybe they will decide they don't need
entire meta-package, but just one of its components.)

   Jeremy C. Reed
   http://bsd.reedmedia.net/