Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 13:54:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Roman Bogorodskiy <novel@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, lofi@freebsd.org, linimon@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/gnupg Makefile Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.0.9999.0709031352120.31928@ync.qbhto.arg> In-Reply-To: <20070903051037.GA27386@underworld.novel.ru> References: <200709021108.l82B8Axp085777@repoman.freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.0.9999.0709021304590.54479@ync.qbhto.arg> <20070903051037.GA27386@underworld.novel.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Roman Bogorodskiy wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> I don't think this is a good idea for a few reasons. First off, the gnupg
>> port already has a pkg-message that is pretty clear about the fact that you
>> need to pick a pinentry dialog.
>
> To be honest, I don't think that reporting about dependencies via
> pkg-message is a sane way of doing things.
Reasonable minds can differ on that topic. :)
> Our ports system is mature enough to handle dependencies on its own,
> without requiring users to install dependencies by hand.
While in general I agree, in this case, given that the "right" choice
isn't obvious I think it's reasonable. However ...
>> I sort of think that this might be reasonable if the pinentry port grew
>> OPTIONS, which I would even be willing to work on if lofi thought it was a
>> good idea. But I don't think the overhead of drawing all of the dialogs in
>> is worth it, and I don't see an easy way of guessing which one the user
>> would want by default.
>
> OPTIONS would be reasonable in this case. We can enable ncurses backend
> by default and user will be able to configure the port to make it use
> other backends he/she wants.
That is basically what I had in mind. I'd like to hear from lofi, but my
offer to help with that is still good.
>> Can this change be backed out till there has been a little discussion?
>
> Backed out.
I appreciate the prompt response, as do our users (one of whom was already
bitten by this).
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.0.9999.0709031352120.31928>