Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 23:50:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: perryh@pluto.rain.com Cc: ports@freebsd.org, 1cynthia2flynn3@telus.net, rizzo@iet.unipi.it, gary.jennejohn@freenet.de, skreuzer@exit2shell.com Subject: Re: mtools vs X11 (Re: FreeBSD Port: syslinux-3.72) Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0903192349470.1219@ync.qbhto.arg> In-Reply-To: <49c1fd04.Ul73kIip/JpE7k7C%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <49C00745.1050607@telus.net> <20090318001138.GF95451@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <20090318113023.7bc51ef4@ernst.jennejohn.org> <49c1fd04.Ul73kIip/JpE7k7C%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Gary Jennejohn <gary.jennejohn@freenet.de> wrote:
>> Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> wrote:
>>> ... Cynthia Flynn wrote:
>> [snip - syslinux pulls in too much X11 stuff]
>>> I think the extra dependencies that you find listed for syslinux:
>>> [snip]
>>> come directly from mtools ...
>>
>> Yeah. It looks like mtools uses X11 by default, which IMHO is
>> incorrect. Instead it should have an option to turn X11 _on_,
>> rather than one for turning it _off_, as it currently does.
>
> IMO it is a POLA violation for mtools to depend on X11 *at all*.
>
> Instead of having an option, maybe the port should be split so that
> mtools itself just provides the code to access FAT filesystems, and
> (say) mtools-gui does the fancy display stuff.
That sounds like a reasonable course of action. I've cc'ed the maintainer
to get their opinion.
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.2.00.0903192349470.1219>