Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 13:12:24 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Parv <parv@pair.com> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11-wm/fvwm2-devel Makefile pkg-plist ports/x11-wm/fvwm2-devel/files patch-configure Message-ID: <20050915131224.GB94650@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20050914222511.GA11455@holestein.holy.cow> References: <200509132211.j8DMBYpj090708@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050914022354.GA7740@holestein.holy.cow> <20050914061957.GA13354@FreeBSD.org> <20050914222511.GA11455@holestein.holy.cow>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 06:25:11PM -0400, Parv wrote: > in message <20050914061957.GA13354@FreeBSD.org>, > wrote Alexey Dokuchaev thusly... > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 10:23:54PM -0400, Parv wrote: > > > in message <200509132211.j8DMBYpj090708@repoman.freebsd.org>, > > > wrote Alexey Dokuchaev thusly... > > > > > > > > Log: > > > > - Convert to OPTIONS > > > > > > Ah dang. > > > > Once again, could you please explain what you do not like about OPTIONS? > > If you need to reconfigure the port at some point, there's "make config" > > for this purpose. > > I was just expressing my general disappointment as in "another one > bites the dust". The issue of OPTIONS-fying has been covered in > past definitely by others, and i might have chimed in too. IMHO, sticking to an old-world order, you're locking yourself of out many advantages that OPTIONS bring to you. There're about a dozen of options, and more will appear (I'm about to pull some nifty Gentoo patches to fvwm2-devel in some near future). Without OPTIONS, our users would have to read the Makefile (well, that could be avoided by priting them in pre-everything:: target), but they would still need to manually define all those knobs on command line (or in pkgtools.conf). > > > > > > - Add WITH_RPLAY knob, kill WITHOUT_XINERAMA since it was of > > > > little use > > > > > > Whatever. > > > > As I said earlier, it does not hurt to have it: there's no extra > > dependency, and this simplifies things for people. > > me with example when using this option is the onl > > I am sorry, that was bad edit on my part, i should have removed > "WITH_RPLAY" reference when i replied. > > Again, I was expressing my disappointment about the removal of > WITHOUT_XINERAMA (why/how was already covered either in some PR of > one of the ports lists). This is plain silly, shall you excuse me. Before we can discuss it, I want to hear about some real overhead/troubles you have with it enabled by default. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050915131224.GB94650>