Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reword section about multiple package version #422

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

DanielO
Copy link

@DanielO DanielO commented Oct 4, 2024

The current wording implies that having X installed would result in a different nginx package being installed which is wrong. Also add a note about why the user might want to choose to build it from ports.

The current wording implies that having X installed would result in a different nginx package being installed which is wrong.
Also add a note about why the user might want to choose to build it from ports.
Copy link
Contributor

@concussious concussious left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor suggestions, overall really nice!

In some cases, multiple packages will exist for the same application to specify certain settings. For example, NGINX(R) is available as a `nginx` package and a `nginx-lite` package, depending on whether or not Xorg is installed. Creating multiple packages rapidly becomes impossible if an application has more than one or two different compile-time options.
In some cases, multiple packages will exist for the same application with different settings. For example, NGINX(R) is available as a `nginx` package and a `nginx-lite` package, the former has many more options enabled, but this in turn requires many things to be installed as dependencies for it to work, thus increasing space consumption and attack surface.
+
The transitive dependencies can grow quite large, for example the full `nginx` package will pull in several X libraries which can be quite surprising, so building from ports allow you to choose only the options you need without a "kitchen sink" approach.In some cases, multiple packages will exist for the same application to specify certain settings.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
The transitive dependencies can grow quite large, for example the full `nginx` package will pull in several X libraries which can be quite surprising, so building from ports allow you to choose only the options you need without a "kitchen sink" approach.In some cases, multiple packages will exist for the same application to specify certain settings.
The transitive dependencies can grow quite large, for example the full `nginx` package will pull in several X libraries which can be quite surprising, so building from the ports tree allows you to choose only the options you need without a "kitchen sink" approach. In some cases, multiple packages will exist for the same application to specify certain settings.

Copy link
Contributor

@concussious concussious Oct 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the confusion between packages and ports can be solved by using the term ports collection like wikipedia does meaning the applications ported to freebsd, and using ports tree meaning the tree where they can be compiled.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, picking some standard nomenclature is a good idea.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants