Re: pkg/42263 (add PKG_OPTIONS to meta-pkgs/php5-extensions)

[diro%nixsyspaus.org@localhost]

The following reply was made to PR pkg/42263; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: diro%nixsyspaus.org@localhost
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: pkg-manager%netbsd.org@localhost, gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost, 
pkgsrc-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: pkg/42263 (add PKG_OPTIONS to meta-pkgs/php5-extensions)
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 07:29:13 -0500

 On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 12:00:07PM +0000, OBATA Akio wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR pkg/42263; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: "OBATA Akio" <obache%netbsd.org@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: pkg/42263 (add PKG_OPTIONS to meta-pkgs/php5-extensions)
 > Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:57:23 +0900
 > 
 >  On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:35:01 +0900, <diro%nixsyspaus.org@localhost> wrote:
 >  
 >  >  That is exactly what i'm proposing:  an easier installation. There needs 
 > to be a
 >  >  medium between "install fscking everything" and install what you want 
 > manually
 >  >  without a) having to maintain a private package b) recommenting a 
 > Makefile upon
 >  >  unpacking a new pkgsrc quarterly release. pkg_chk is also not the 
 > solution i'm
 >  >  going for here.
 >  
 >  Why not pkg_chk?
 >  What is the differ between "set module name to PKG_OPTION" and "set package 
 > path to pkgchk.conf"?
 
 
 Because i do not use pkg_chk. pkgchk.conf is another config file i'd have to
 write and maintain when i already use mk.conf. I do not need two config files 
to
 manage my packages.
 
   
 >  >  Also, please do not be in such a rush to close this PR. Allow some other
 >  >  developers to view it first and see the value in this if you're having 
 > some
 >  >  difficulty understanding it.
 >  
 >  FYI:
 >  http://mail-index.netbsd.org/pkgsrc-users/2008/06/29/msg007473.html
 
 
 I understand the initial discussion here; however, that package in question is
 of four dependencies. meta-pkgs/php5-extensions is ~50. Why cannot an empty
 PKG_OPTIONS for meta-pkgs/php5-extensions default to building everything and
 otherwise could be set to build a few modules? Why are we holding onto the idea
 that a meta-pkg is everything and cannot be tailored? There is already a number
 of packages which work in a similar manner. Why not this one?
 
 -- 
 !tr
 --
 Timothy Lee Roden
     Systems Administrator - Nixsys Public Access UNIX System
     http://nixsyspaus.org
 GPG Key fingerprint = 8669 0AFC 2051 0C05 2D9C  FB9F D7F6 8838 73E8 BA22