From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 21 19:20:39 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B93016A4CE for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:20:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from voodoo.oberon.net (voodoo.oberon.net [212.118.165.100]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B1F43D54 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:20:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from krion@voodoo.oberon.net) Received: from krion by voodoo.oberon.net with local (Exim 4.44 (FreeBSD)) id 1D3J6k-0004Zo-34; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 20:20:38 +0100 Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 20:20:38 +0100 From: Kirill Ponomarew To: Michael Nottebrock Message-ID: <20050221192038.GI9175@voodoo.oberon.net> References: <20050221142951.GA48781@pc5-179.lri.fr> <200502211744.52024.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <20050221181645.GH9175@voodoo.oberon.net> <200502211948.46005.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200502211948.46005.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> X-NCC-Regid: de.oberon X-NIC-HDL: KP869-RIPE Keywords: 579279786 cc: Marwan Burelle cc: Simon Barner cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: devel/pcre and WITH_UTF8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 19:20:39 -0000 On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 07:48:41PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote: > > I could split net/gnunet into: > > gnunet-gdbm, gnunet-mysql, gnunet-tdb, gnunet-bdb3, gnunet-sqlite, > > gnunet-ipv6, gnunet-guile, hence we get 7 slave ports and one master > > port. > > That would certainly be better than the current status quo, which makes the > gnunet package rather bare-bones - at least you should convert it to OPTIONS > and default them to on. I have a slight sceptical attitude towards OPTIONS :) Well, at least there is a possibility to do it without slaves creation, but patching OPTIONS to support it would be even better. > However, you wouldn't need to bother with a gnunet-ipv6 port - > even the option is rather gratuitous. Yeah, that's right. -Kirill