From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Fri Dec 22 08:54:21 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D86E89C09; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 08:54:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yuri@freebsd.org) Received: from shell1.rawbw.com (shell1.rawbw.com [198.144.192.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB0CC6E06C; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 08:54:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yuri@freebsd.org) Received: from yv.noip.me (c-24-6-186-56.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.6.186.56]) (authenticated bits=0) by shell1.rawbw.com (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id vBM8sId9014046 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 22 Dec 2017 00:54:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from yuri@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: shell1.rawbw.com: Host c-24-6-186-56.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.6.186.56] claimed to be yv.noip.me Reply-To: yuri@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r455079 - in head/net-im/ricochet: . files To: Alexey Dokuchaev Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org References: <201711282137.vASLbFPV093863@repo.freebsd.org> <20171129065128.GA71839@FreeBSD.org> From: Yuri Message-ID: <8627a4da-69f7-4993-ba8f-6e96e69fca9d@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 00:54:17 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171129065128.GA71839@FreeBSD.org> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.25 X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 08:54:21 -0000 On 11/28/17 22:51, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > I don't get it: if Tor is*required* for ${PORTNAME} to run (per TOR_DESC), > why not simply remove the option and use normal RUN_DEPENDS? > > If it, under some circumstances, is*not required* to run, then TOR_DESC > should be reworded. Now it is just plain confusing. Sorry, I didn't notice your message before. Tor is required for ricochet, so the message is correct. However, some people want to run custom versions of Tor, therefore it is optional. It doesn't look confusing to me. It is required, but there are other ways to run Tor than the official Tor port. Yuri