tech-pkg archive

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

Re: Making DESTDIR support mandatory

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 01:22:25PM +0400, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
> You had the same time to fix qmail and nagios as well as any other person.
> Except you were working on this actively, while noone else understood
> what the fuss was about, and you didn't care to explain. Now you have
> few hard cases remaining, you declare them broken. Perfect!
> Why have you not converted them then? You had four years for it.

I beg to differ. You didn't understand what the fuss was about.

For some other people, the benefits of fully DESTDIR-compliant ports trees
are rather obvious.

Stop thinking you exist in a vacuum. OpenBSD did that conversion a few years
ago (back around 2004). The results, in terms of quality of the resulting
binary packages, have been rather striking and obvious.

When time came to choose between tweakability of a few (very few) "special"
ports ("special" as a synonym for "retarded", "brain-dead") and the 
reliability that came with dependendable binary packages, the decision was
an easy one we NEVER regretted.

It also couldn't have happened without EVERYONE pitching in.

You can't do total portstree sweeps/conversions with a small team. If the
individual maintainers don't help, it's doomed to failure.

I guess it depends what your goals are...

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index