On Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:12:35 +0000, Eitan Adler wrote:
The .pkgconf suffix tells pkgng that this file is a sample. But it
could
also be done via an attribute.
I would much prefer an attribute instead of a suffix for the reasons
previously stated.
I hope this is not bikeshedding the issue.
The reason I choose pkgconf (we can change that name) is that it
concerns only configuration files that the maintainers DO want.
I want to make sure that maintainers are looking at the samples the
proprose to provide a usable sample, not the default one from the
distfile (the default one can still be provided as an example.)
I wanted that pkgng and the ports in general can manage default usable
configuration files, and to distinguish them from the samples. Thanks
crees@ has done the job I wanted to do myself so that and he has done it
right.
the extension name can be change from pkgconf to a smarter name like
pkgdefault or pkgexample (yes I want that users know it cames from the
package not the upstream distfiles.
I'm open to suggestion
Doing stuff with @exec or scripts should be for special cases, not
for
common cases such as config files.
Does something like @sample work?
with current pkg_tools we have no choice than using @exec, the new tool
we can avoid that to have a dedicated behaviour.
pkgng doesn't even know about @exec and @unexec.
regards,
Bapt
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
