Re: OpenAFS port

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 06:17:25PM +0300, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> 
> > Personally I thinks that is overly complicated. Installing a few
> > binaries that I don't use is not a big deal. Having three ports for a
> > server+client system is confusing, especially since it is not very
> > common practice. I'd vote for one single port, with rc switches to
> > activate the different parts.
> 
> Anyway we can't create packages since kernel sources and objs are
> needed. Then really it's worth having only one port. The default
> net/openafs installs both server and client. While OPENAFS_SERVER_ONLY
> and OPENAFS_CLIENT_ONLY do what they should.

I like the single-port idea the best, and use the OPENAFS_*_ONLY variables
to disable one half.  I agree with others that three ports is unnecessarily
complicated.  Unless there's really a technical reason to separate ports
that can't be worked around, I vote: one port.

Thank you for your efforts!

-- Rick C. Petty
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-afs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"