|From:||Jasse Jansson <jasse@xxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:52:12 +0100|
Well, it can sort of be accomplished with pkgsrc. Before the configureWell, that could a be realized with pkgsrc and its likes. But, as IFor binary packages: Always have a minimal build, as well a typical build ("Surely, *everyone* wants OpenGL support in their xmms...").
For "some compiling required" packages: Have minimal and typical
configurations that can be selected, as well as letting the user
customize. And list options relevant for the package! (with/out X11,
Truetype ...) I'm thinking maybe checkboxes?
already wrote in my posting before this one, it is merely a problem
of the software packages of today that they leave no clear separation of
compilation and configuration. Which makes it, as far as I can tell,
impossible to do a 'minimal build' on the usual, fully compiled binary
step, you'll usually get an on-screen message saying "The following flags
may affect the build of this package; USE_X11", or something similar,
scrolling by. I think the ports system is better in this regard, with the
menu thingy that some packages gives you.
Yes, but please discern all aspects *strictly*. The configure step you write of, is a step *only* applicable to building-processes, not the installation of binary packages.
Also, I reminded of the fact that it is a problem of the software packages *themselves*. They shouldn't require users to compile-in configuration options. So, its not our task, in a way.