Re: implement .so

[Ingo Schwarze <schwarze@usta.de>]

Hi Joerg,

Joerg Sonnenberger wrote on Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 07:38:57PM +0200:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 07:29:14PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:

>> Converting .so to hard links would be an option if we were talking
>> about just one build system.  But ports have all kinds of different
>> build systems.

> Actually, if you consider ports itself as build system it is exactly
> that.  Once you have run the "make install" of the target package,
> iterate over the PLIST of the package and check for .so usage in the man
> pages and fix them up. That's similar to fixing up compressed vs
> uncompressed man pages.

That does indeed sound possible.

But i doubt it causes less maintenance work compared to just
implementing .so.

 * It would need to be done for both ports and Xenocara.
 * It would need to be done in each operating and ports system
   using mandoc; on a medium term, that may amount to at least
   four systems (OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, DragonFly BSD).
 * From a maintenance perspective, .so does not seem that bad:
   it's strictly local in main.c without tentacles into any libs.
 * It would also put the code where it belongs: .so is a roff
   feature, not a build system feature.
 * All people i'm asking tend to say i should not worry that
   much about the my security concerns, maybe i'm indeed
   excessively paranoid in that respect.

Yours,
  Ingo
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv