[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: new openjade package
- To: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: new openjade package
- From: Marc Espie <Marc_(_dot_)_Espie_(_at_)_liafa_(_dot_)_jussieu_(_dot_)_fr>
- Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 18:32:06 +0200
- Mail-followup-to: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 09:08:06AM -0400, Matt Behrens wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 08:35:24AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote:
> > You wrote (in your message from 4)
> > > Matthieu Herrb <matthieu_(_at_)_herrb_(_dot_)_com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I've prepared an openjade port (based on openjade 1.3), that should
> > > > replace textproc/jade.
> > >
> > > Hmm, how about a separate OpenSP port? For things like local HTML
> > > validation Jade really isn't needed.
> > Why not. but I don't know how to handle the dependencies or conflicts,
> > since opensp is included in openjade.
> You could always MULTI_PACKAGE it, then insert a pkgdep line into
> openjade's PLIST for opensp (assuming openjade needs opensp, which,
> if my memory serves me with the old jade, it does)
See also the newly repackaged pine for the way to handle such issues.
This is essentially trivial to do.
The only question is benefits... MULTI_PACKAGES should usually be done
for good reasons, as they raise the package tree complexity.
|anime, sf, juggling, unicycle, acrobatics, comics...
|AmigaOS, OpenBSD, C++, perl, Icon, PostScript...
| `real programmers don't die, they just get out of beta'