From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 8 13:34:48 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A12111065670 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:34:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lb0-f182.google.com (mail-lb0-f182.google.com [209.85.217.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14CD68FC08 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:34:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbon10 with SMTP id n10so1659949lbo.13 for ; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 06:34:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=rpD8Aa5RcjU5a83e/gFc7Fgw6eZqWyXiRXAXTw1b/R0=; b=Qr5Pk+0HAdZZJm0sUe3fhepIwKckSuT6nBoxqhsLnWaXAW5lSDRU1jhroZF/J2fSMs IgKCjkncXxDy5yKRKT4uM2uGoRStW8K/+twG0L2AKC+fQtEquVEqlAL6Yo9LnejrSAWC HW1FOMNWlNcAP/vZCar34vCeh26bKqh/KqMdG6nIhktw/sOb6GhGeCuBafh3Wem7JaSU fpx6D5tlk2wm+p7t9fiEdHUs4qe3/9x8meGcm6qPlqbpYPpG6t5EVntMHZYmJ3/vb0o5 YLn95Zj37y7ZT2GEUb1xDbxLxRYFz744d8h157gsIn6QroZqWYwEYCQsdNrKQZwoT4OT sIUw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.125.116 with SMTP id mp20mr8428961lab.19.1339162462868; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 06:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.30.73 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 06:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.30.73 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 06:34:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4FD1FEB5.4000703@cyberbotx.com> References: <20120603184448.GI92976@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <4FD1FEB5.4000703@cyberbotx.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 14:34:22 +0100 Message-ID: From: Chris Rees To: Naram Qashat Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Please convert your ports to new options framework X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 13:34:48 -0000 On Jun 8, 2012 2:32 PM, "Naram Qashat" wrote: > > On 06/03/12 14:44, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> The new options framework is now in the port for a week, most of the problems >> directly concerning the framework seems to have been addressed. >> >> Some issue seems still to be there regarding backward compatibility but I >> haven't been able to reproduced any of the one that are supposed to be left. >> >> The porters handbook has been updated and the new option framework is well >> documented (thank you crees) >> >> Please convert as soon as possible your ports to the new framework. As you may >> already have notice bsd.options.desc.mk provide shared descriptions of the usual >> options, try to be consistent and reuse the same options name so that it is >> simpler for users, please override the description for your ports each time it >> make sense, remember that most of the time a functional description is more >> accurate than a technical one, users might not know the technical details but >> they know what functionnality they do want. >> >> All the complaints I found in the past concerning the old framework have been >> addressed in the new one, you can have mutually exclusive options, checked by >> the framework, you can have group options, you can have 0 or only 1 option among >> N or 0 or N options among M. be creative, most of the use case should be doable. >> >> for 3 special options: DOCS, EXAMPLES and NLS, you do not need to activate them >> in OPTIONS_DEFAULT as the framework already activate them. you also do not need >> to add them to OPTIONS_DEFINE if you only use one of them, do avoid having the >> dialog UI to show up. >> >> DOCS in long term maybe used to replace NOPORTDOCS (NOPORTDOCS is defined has a >> backward compatibility if as a user you remove it). >> >> Same goes for EXAMPLES -> NOPORTEXAMPLES >> and NLS -> WITHOUT_NLS >> >> In my concern the priority is: >> >> 1/ convert all the old OPTIONS: >> Here is a list of them >> http://wiki.freebsd.org/Ports/Options/ConvertingToOptionsNG >> >> 2/ replace all the knobs by optionsNg options (replacing the KNOBS file by >> bsd.options.desc >> >> regards, >> Bapt > > > So I have a question from a consumer standpoint as opposed to a maintainer standpoint. If we use portconf to store all of our WITH_* options for ports, will that continue to work with ports that have switched to optionsng or is there something I need to change in my ports.conf file for the options to continue to be recognized? > I'll make you a nice script for that purpose later. Chris