From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 30 13:10:03 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65249E3F for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 13:10:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@grem.de) Received: from mail.grem.de (outcast.grem.de [213.239.217.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AEA63F28 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 13:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 75079 invoked by uid 89); 30 May 2013 13:10:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bsd64.grem.de) (mg@grem.de@109.43.0.62) by mail.grem.de with ESMTPA; 30 May 2013 13:10:00 -0000 Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:09:55 +0200 From: Michael Gmelin To: John Marino Subject: Re: shells/bash: Options slightly confusing Message-ID: <20130530150955.2916170a@bsd64.grem.de> In-Reply-To: <51A7413D.9010104@marino.st> References: <20130530132742.43455bba@bsd64.grem.de> <51A7413D.9010104@marino.st> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:10:03 -0000 On Thu, 30 May 2013 14:08:29 +0200 John Marino wrote: > On 5/30/2013 13:27, Michael Gmelin wrote: > > I assume there are better ways to make this clear. It might even > > make sense to have a basic distinction on the ports system level - > > options that provide additional features vs. options that > > change the (default) behavior of the port. > > Isn't this implicit in the option default selection? In other words, > the fact that it's pre-selected indicates the default behavior of the > port, right? > > Even in the case of a dialog showing where it didn't before isn't a > logical reason to think pre-selected options are changes in default > behavior, at least not to me. > There's been some debate over the bash port earlier this year, plus it has been converted to OptionsNg recently (AFAIK it had no options dialog before), therefore my pessimism. But regardless of default options and updating - if I installed bash for the first time and seen an option labeled as "Use directory name alone to cd into it" I would assume that bash will behave like this after installation without further configuration - in contrast to adding the ability to do that ("Support feature"). Maybe it's just me though :) -- Michael Gmelin