From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 13 22:34:05 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A1F616A4CE; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:34:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.struchtrup.de (mail.struchtrup.de [80.190.247.172]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F30943D3F; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:34:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from seb@struchtrup.com) Received: from dialin-145-254-088-136.arcor-ip.net ([145.254.88.136]) by mail.struchtrup.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.42 (FreeBSD)) id 1CHrjM-0003CF-IO; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:36:24 +0000 Message-ID: <416DAD91.8000002@struchtrup.com> Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:34:57 +0200 From: Sebastian Schulze Struchtrup User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (X11/20040517) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Frank J. Laszlo" References: <416C0DE8.3000004@struchtrup.com> <416C35A5.4040703@vonostingroup.com> <20041013123840.GB1301@FreeBSD.org> <20041013193547.GB53895@hub.freebsd.org> <416DAB2A.3060900@vonostingroup.com> In-Reply-To: <416DAB2A.3060900@vonostingroup.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Struchtrup-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Struchtrup-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: seb@struchtrup.com cc: Eivind Eklund cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: alternative options for ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:34:05 -0000 >>> On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 03:51:01PM -0400, Frank Laszlo wrote: >>> If you've got more *specific* problems with usability (like the batch >>> build problem above), I'm very interested, as I'm trying to collect >>> these for doing a new round of fixes for the options support in >>> bsd.port.mk. >>> >> >> >> BTW, has anyone started to impliment the NO__OPTIONS feature >> that was requested? >> >> > That sounds like a great idea to me, I would definately like to devote > some time to implementing such a feature if the demand is there. It > doesnt sound like it would be very difficult to acomplish. And I'm > glad to see someone shares my feelings on dialog's in ports :) > I think there will be some major changes with these config options. A global NO_OPTIONS is also planned like David has written. I understand your problems, too. I have also had this one (or some more) times, starting a large portupgrade over night and to see the next morning that it has stopped at 9pm inside a dialog. But I think this is solved by a global NO_OPTIONS setting for those who don't like it. Probably it would be best to wait a few days and check what else needs to be changed. With regard to naming, I would suggest something like NO_MENUCONFIG (if this is not yet implemented and used). Just for discussion. NO_OPTIONS can probably lead to some misunderstanding to build ports without anything. But configuration through pkgtools or env variables still works. Sebastian > Regards, > Frank