Subject: Re: emacs22
To: Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
From: Dieter Baron <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/08/2007 12:14:40
In article <604662FC-84E4-4FC1-88ED-8ADFDBA1E8F4@gmail.com> Julio wrote:
: On 07/06/2007, at 16:37, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
: > I was asked to kill emacs-nox11 and make GUI an option. I'm fine with
: > that _if_ the default is "nox11". How do others think?
: Why? That's an step backwards. Binary-only users will have no
: choice to install a non-graphical emacs (or viceversa, if nox11 was
: the default). I dislike (hate?) using options this way because they
: prevent making pkgsrc an option to consider when looking for a binary-
: only packaging system.
Because having separate packages for different build options does
not scale well and is hard to maintain.
What we should do is specify which option combinations are important
enough so we want binary packages for them and then build all of those
during a bulk build.
Joerg's new bulk build framework supports building multiple versions
of a package from one package directory. So we would need a way to
specify option combinations (and have the bulk build framework pick
that up) and a way to name the resulting binary packages.
Maybe something like PKG_OPTIONS_BINTAGS that is a list of tags for
binary packages to build from this directory (binary packages will be
named PKGBASE-TAG-VERSION.tgz) and PKG_OPTIONS_BIN.tag that lists the
options setting. In additionto the tags, a binary package with the
suggested options is built, called PKGBASE-VERSION.tgz.