On Thu, Feb 10, 2000 at 10:19:18PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> >Am I the only one being little annoyed by this fact?
>
> This comes up regularly. The last I recall was a thread "a two-level
> port system?" in -hackers last May/June.
Actually, -ports discussed this quite recently, and it was suggested that
we combine some of the directories to reduce the number of inodes in half.
This discussion belongs on -ports anyway.. so I'm bcc'ing -current.
> My favourite solution (because it's mine) would be to replace the
> existing each port skeleton directory with a single ar(5) file, which
> is unpacked into the directory structure when you make the port. (I
> think ar(5) would be a good choice because (a) it is text, and so can
> be easily managed by CVS; (b) it includes a tool - ar(1) - for easily
> managing the files).
So, what you'd do is archive all of these directories into ar files, and
have the Makefile unpack the archive whenever a port is needed? It would
preserve the current Makefile, pkg/, scripts/, files/, etc. hierarchy?
(How the hell would you pull that off? I've only known ar(1) to be used for
creating library archives later ranlib'd..)
Seems like this idea would make an initial install much faster and the
inode/directory creation would be spread over time. Am I right?
How would this affect the CVS repository? Would we still have to deal with
the current hierarchy in the ports tree as it is? Or would we deal with it
in ar(5) form?
Which format would CVSUP update - ar(5) or current hierarchy? If it updates
ar(5) form, how will bsd.port.mk know to update the directory tree for a
particular port if the particular port is already unarchived?
> What's need to change the existing structure is:
> 1) A completely implemented replacement, including the tools necessary
> to manage the new structure.
> 2) Agreement from Asami-san (and maybe others) to implement the changed
> structure.
I'm sure if Satoshi heard the answers to the above questions (among others
asked), we'd be well on our way to having a new ports hierarchy for
5.0-CURRENT. :-)
But it probably won't happen before 4.0-RELEASE since that's just too close
to implement something big like this..
--
Will Andrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GCS/E/S @d- s+:+>+:- a--->+++ C++ UB++++ P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w---
?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++>++++ DI+++ D+
G++>+++ e->++++ h! r-->+++ y?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
