Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:59:57 +0200 From: Mel Flynn <rflynn@acsalaska.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OPTIONSng and OPTIONS_SINGLE, OPTIONS_MULTI Message-ID: <4FD5EBCD.5010005@acsalaska.net> In-Reply-To: <4FD586EF.20100@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <4FD586EF.20100@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11-6-2012 7:49, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Surely it is more sensible to say that OPTIONS_SINGLE is strictly
> 'choose one from these options.' Then you can implement 'zero or one of
> these options' by:
>
> OPTIONS_SINGLE= EXAMPLE
> OPTIONS_SINGLE_EXAMPLE= FOO BAR BAZ BLURFL NONE_OF_THE_ABOVE
I like this approach and it would be nice if you can have a standard
"none" option, rendered in the dialog consistently "none" with text
"none of the above", but translated to ${GROUPNAME}_NONE for the port
and optionsfile. The group should be indented so one sees what "of the
above" applies to.
So the definition would look like:
OPTIONS_NONEORONE= EXAMPLE
OPTIONS_NONEORONE_EXAMPLE= BLONDE BRUNETTE
And the port's test would be:
.if ${OPTIONS:MEXAMPLE_NONE}
# yay, no work for me
.else
# crap which one he pick
.endif
--
Mel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FD5EBCD.5010005>