Re: pkg/45136 ([MAINTAINER][PATCH] www/aws, fix DESTDIR breakage and other problems)

[John Marino <netbsd%marino.st@localhost>]

On 7/25/2011 11:05 AM, OBATA Akio wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 23:40:03 +0900, John Marino <netbsd%marino.st@localhost>
> wrote:
> 
>> "Why do you want to use dynamic GENERATE_PLIST?" The answer is WAY
>> more complicated than a simple pdf option.  Believe me, I had good
>> reason to remove the existing static list and replace it with the
>> dynamic one.  The number of permutations of files with the entire
>> set of options is large, and using a static list is prone to error.
>> Without going into a lot of detail, it would be best to accept that
>> a dynamic PLIST is the way to go here, which will always be
>> correct.  The existing PLIST isn't "correct" minus pdf either, it's
>> going several existing problems with it.
> 
> At least, some of files in your GENERATE_PLIST (ex. bin/aws_password,
> and so on) no need to be generated dynamically, so you can put those
> files in static PLIST. If some conditionally installed files are
> large set, you can put those files in  separate PLIST.* files and add
> those file names to PLIST_SRC conditionally.
> 
> Disadvantage of full dynamically PLIST generation are:
> 
> * We cannot track changes of installed files between version up of
> the package * We cannot confirm what files will be installed before
> trying to install the package * We cannot catch up accidental
> mis-installation, say, "some required files are not installed", or
> "some redundant files are installed".

I was not aware that static PLIST file can be used with dynamically
generated PLIST.  I thought it was one or the other.

Clearly GENERATE_PLIST exists for a reason.  Can't we just accept the
disadvantages (only the third one catches my interest at all) to close
out this tested iteration?  On the next update, I can move some of these
into a static PLIST (PLIST + GENERATE_PLIST = complete PLIST?)

Regards,
John