-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 747
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
Add new category fs for file systems #302
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
I personally like that idea. That sounds reasonable because there are more ports than x11-clocks. BTW, I like filesystem(s) more than fs. |
Hi',El 30 sept 2024 2:30, metalefty ***@***.***> escribió:
I personally like that idea. That sounds reasonable because there are more ports than x11-clocks. BTW, I like filesystem(s) more than fs.Same opinion +1Rodrigo
—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
+1 I like this idea too. |
Robert, as we discussed in Dublin, I generally think creating a new Here are a few more for you:
|
@Jehops Thank you for your concerns. The current comment was supposed to read:
but I must have dropped the second half during copy editing. I'll restore that in my next push. I am open to having a category for only file system drivers, but I would prefer to also put the fs utilities in there. We could also add two categories: one for file system drivers and one for associated utilities (e.g. I'll go add the other two ports, too. |
Taking inspiration from existing comments, how about
|
@Jehops Yeah sure, works for me. I'll put that in with my next edit. |
The fs category houses file systems and file system utilities. It is added mainly to turn the sysutils/fusefs-* pseudo-category into a proper one, but is also useful for the sundry of other file systems related ports found in the tree. Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
Approved by: portmgr
This patch set adds a new category fs for file systems and file system utilities. The new category is populated with some 126 ports (that's more than x11-clocks!) that look like they might be file-system related.
I was motivated to add this new category when I noticed that many FUSE file systems were shipped as ports named sysutils/fusefs-$foo, making sysutils/fusefs- a pseudo-category for FUSE filesystems. If that's the (anti) pattern, why not make it offical and add a true category for file system ports? Turns out there are a lot more than one might think.
I hope that with this move, we can reduce the load on devel and sysutils (the two most popular misspellings of misc) and make file-system related ports easier to find.
If accepted, this'll be the first new physical category since c5978f0 of 2007-05-19 to be added.
For a full list of affected ports, see the list of commits attached to this PR. If you would like to not have your port moved to fs, please comment or send me an email.
Note that this PR is still wip and will be reviewed, exp-ran, etc. before being committed.