Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 05:25:58 -0800 From: Kent Stewart <kstewart@owt.com> To: Thomas Gravgaard <fehaar@infopaq.dk> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvsup-16-f issue Message-ID: <3C3EE7E6.9030509@owt.com> References: <1137F4C2EFF6D111B2330060B03C89D601C8E9D7@REDSRV>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thomas Gravgaard wrote: >>I wonder if it might make sense for the ISO to only have a >>cvsup which does not have X11. A version without X11 will >>run OK on a system that does have X11, but the X11-version >>won't run on a system without X11, and it's certainly >>reasonable to *want* to run cvsup on a system that doesn't >>have X11. And presumably it'd also save a few bytes on the ISO. >> > > IMHO it would make sense to require WITH_X11 instead of WITHOUT_X11 in the Makefile because the default behaviour would run on systems with an without X11. Since I only run boxes without X11 it would > conveniently make my life easier too.... But thats another story :) I happen to think that cvsup is one program that should be added as a package. You reduce the side effects introduced by having one port that needs a modula compiler. The s1g site has both versions and you download your choice. Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA mailto:kbstew99@hotmail.com http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html FreeBSD News http://daily.daemonnews.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C3EE7E6.9030509>