[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Regarding package options and split packages (was: Re: devel/git and devel/git-base are confusing)
> - Are we ok going the rpm way? Binary first culture?
> - If rpm build system (don't know how many people have the habit to build
> from sources among rpm uses) supports options, that's a good thing. The
> worry here is pkgsrc discouraging use of options.
> Question is not about pkgsrc as a framework supports options or not.
> It's about whether pkgsrc packages are encouraged to utilize them or are
> they discouraged. As the replies on git suggest, it seems it's being
> discouraged. That's the worry.
Yes, having split packages instead of options is usually better.
The pkgsrc guide summarize that pretty well:
There are two broad classes of behaviors that one might want to control via
options. One is whether some particular feature is enabled in a program that
will be built anyway, often by including or not including a dependency on some
other package. The other is whether or not an additional program will be built
as part of the package. Generally, it is better to make a split package for
such additional programs instead of using options, because it enables binary
packages to be built which can then be added separately.
Please give a look to chapter 18 of The pkgsrc guide for more
rationale other cases regarding that.
Main Index |
Thread Index |