* Jeremy Messenger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > How do you deal with the security? It will be required for all ports that > depend on a port to be rebuild, so bump the PORTREVISION will be need. But > what about for non-static that don't need to be bump? A solution for that > might be need too. > > I have no object with static build as long as it is flexible and optional > (disable/enable).
I know all the negative sides of static builds, as much larger binary sizes, memory consumption, upgrade problems when dependent library is vulnerable/updated etc, but I just thought that it could be useful sometimes. For example, I'd rather install static package of some Gnome/KDE app (while I don't use Gnome/KDE) than install all dependencies (that are mandatory just because somebody didn't bother to OPTIONSify, say, kdelibs). What I propose is just an option that may be usedul, but don't guarantee anything. Like, for example, WITH_DEBUG. But, yes, it would be nice to indicate that the port should be rebuild if any of libs it use are updated, I need to think about it. -- Best regards, Dmitry Marakasov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
