--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:31:54AM -0400, Nathan J. Williams wrote:
> Julio Merino <slink@unixbsd.org> writes:
>=20
> I don't think that either of these are good ideas. The number of
> different ways to build a package should be as small as possible, so
> that a binary package can be trusted to have certain comments.
>=20
> In your example, I think it would be bad if there could be multiple
> "aumix-2.7.tgz" packages, some of which used GTK and some of which did
> not. The multi-package separation that you see with vim (vim
> vs. vim-gtk vs. vim-xaw) or mtr (mtr vs. mtr-gtk) is a better way to
> handle this.

Right, this seems the right way to go... So, I should do the following
things:

1. Move current's aumix to aumix-gtk.
2. Create a new aumix port to not use gtk. Possibly add here a
   Makefile.common, which I've seen in other packages, to maintaint both
   pkgsrc's in sync.

Right?

Thanks!

>=20
>         - Nathan

--=20
Of course it runs NetBSD - http://www.netbsd.org
Netiquete (spanish): http://www.seei.es/netiquet.htm

Julio Merino <slink@unixbsd.org> #18961975

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (NetBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8sFtCzz00ZOPKycwRAso9AJ4lYrV9F9/USU0iEIgKzEJdbiC+CwCfbLZj
ObkY2swprQZVopiNChyef+c=
=lpUG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5--