From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Jun  2 12:39:43 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15852106564A;
	Sat,  2 Jun 2012 12:39:43 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rflynn@acsalaska.net)
Received: from mailhub.rachie.is-a-geek.net (rachie.is-a-geek.net
	[66.230.99.27])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDFB68FC1B;
	Sat,  2 Jun 2012 12:39:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (squeeze.lan.rachie.is-a-geek.net [192.168.2.30])
	by mailhub.rachie.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF5057E850;
	Sat,  2 Jun 2012 04:39:40 -0800 (AKDT)
Message-ID: <4FCA0988.8030307@acsalaska.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 14:39:36 +0200
From: Mel Flynn <rflynn@acsalaska.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, 
	Michael Scheidell <scheidell@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
References: <4301C0E3-3C53-46E2-B5A5-7BD120CD775F@FreeBSD.org>
	<4FC5F794.9050506@gmail.com> <4FC68FC0.1010707@FreeBSD.org>
	<CAN6yY1tp2-n1DGq6=uT2bVo-sAqP8bwYj+L9OG_zNKm=vpejEQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FC69352.4000702@FreeBSD.org>
	<20120530214803.GD85232@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
	<20120601191331.GR10094@acme.spoerlein.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120601191331.GR10094@acme.spoerlein.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: 
Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] New framework options aka optionng
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 12:39:43 -0000

On 1-6-2012 21:13, Ulrich Spörlein wrote:

> I hate WITHOUT_NLS and NO_PORTDOCS with a passion. They work for 80% of
> the ports you are likely to install, so they are not a safe way to
> escape docs or NLS. Why bother? Seriously, could someone give me a
> usecase for them?

Not sure which ports don't honor NOPORTDOCS, but that should be fixed.
The case of NLS is a bit more special. Even though it is possible to
build all software without gettext, there are some that don't bother and
either build a static version into their library or the port forces the
dependency.
The use case of WITHOUT_NLS is still valid, even when installation is
forced by package foo, package bar that honors the flag will have no
dependency on gettext. This means that gettext can be deinstalled when
foo is deinstalled. This value shouldn't be underestimated as often I'm
looking at a piece of software, don't like it and go look for the next.

Also, if there's automagical detection schemes in ports you know of that
do not respect WITHOUT_NLS, please file PR's for them or send me the
list. It is one of my pet-peeves to get rid of those.
-- 
Mel