Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 10:10:44 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Shawn Barnhart <swb@grasslake.net> Cc: "questions@freebsd.org" <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: stop complaining about x11 please (was: Re: Why does PORTS SUCK so BADLY!?) Message-ID: <20000501101044.F24573@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <009b01bfb389$96546cf0$b8209fc0@marlowe>; from swb@grasslake.net on Mon, May 01, 2000 at 11:23:29AM -0500 References: <009b01bfb389$96546cf0$b8209fc0@marlowe>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Shawn Barnhart <swb@grasslake.net> [000501 09:54] wrote: > > "Rahul Dhesi" <dhesi@rahul.net> wrote in message > news:20000501060813.82C1899F31@waltz.rahul.net... > > > | I have encountered the following problems with ports: > | > | - Doing "make" in some ports directories requires X-Windows to be > | installed even though the software will be used from the command line > | only. It's possible to suppress this with various defines or > > [snip] > > So what is the workaround for this and/or where is it documented? This *is* > supremely annoying, especially when I want to use something like expect or > plotutils and not carry X Windows baggage around. I don't use X Windows on > my machines and deliberately don't install it. > > I don't know who I suggest this to, but it would be EXCELLENT if there was a > flag someplace that would keep X Windows from being built, ever, even if it > halted building ports that wouldn't respect the flag. I imagine the ports > that build with X but don't actually need it would have to be tweaked to > work around this. > > Other than that, I give ports 8 out of 10 stars. NO_X11=YES in /etc/make.conf ? However this doesn't seem to be a system wide thing. There's a sort of problem here, I think NO_X11 needs three options 1) don't build anything requiring X11 2) build the thing without X11 if possible 3) grab X11 if needed Basically, someone should be able to set NO_X11=LITE (or something else, I don't care about the name all that much) so that if you build vim5 it won't try to build the GUI, or perhaps with NO_X11=YES vim will refuse to build because with X11 it is considered crippled. Even if 2 and 3 where made somehow ports-system-wide that would be really nifty. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000501101044.F24573>