Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Monday, December 10, 2007 16:33:20 +0200 Andriy Gapon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From a small research it seems that the only thing needed from cdrtools
is isoinfo utility which gets called in FreeBSD-specific code
(hald/freebsd/probing/probe-volume.c) like follows:
isoinfo -p -i %s
And it seems that its only usage is to detect presence of directories
named 'VIDEO_TS|VCD|SVCD', so that properties like
volume.disc.is_videodvd could be set.

Maybe there is a way to write code for this functionality that could be
included into hal source code or as a port patch, so that hal doesn't
have to depend on cdrtools.
While I have no objections to this particular  suggestion, my question 
would be - where do you stop?  You could easily do this for hundreds (if 
not thousands of ports) that depend upon some other port because of one 
piece of code.
In general. port maintainers follow the guidelines of the software 
developer.  If the developer states that the software depends upon 
cdrtools, then the maintainer is going to include that dependency in the 
port.  Many of us don't have sufficient skill to audit code and 
determine where a dependency could be replaced by some additional code.
So, while this might make sense in isolated cases, I don't think it 
scales well.  Furthermore, modern machines generally have enough disc 
space that the addition of a few "unused" ports to include necessary 
code is a small price to pay to distribute the load of providing ports 
over a larger population of volunteers.  (And yes, I know not everyone 
has a modern machine or large discs to work with.)
I agree.  I think that in this case, cdrtools is a legitimate 
dependency.  The fault (if any) lies not with FreeBSD, but either with 
the writers of hal, or the writers of xorg who made hal a dependency.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to