From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 21 05:00:11 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF8A1065672 for ; Sat, 21 Mar 2009 05:00:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx22.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97CE58FC18 for ; Sat, 21 Mar 2009 05:00:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 28442 invoked by uid 399); 21 Mar 2009 05:00:03 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.12?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 21 Mar 2009 05:00:03 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <49C4744E.7020502@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:59:58 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Kreuzer References: <49C00745.1050607@telus.net> <20090318001138.GF95451@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <20090318113023.7bc51ef4@ernst.jennejohn.org> <49c1fd04.Ul73kIip/JpE7k7C%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <830D8719-1F55-4BE7-B6D5-3C711F2D57C1@exit2shell.com> <49C4098A.6030200@telus.net> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 OpenPGP: id=D5B2F0FB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Cynthia Flynn <1cynthia2flynn3@telus.net> Subject: Re: mtools vs X11 (Re: FreeBSD Port: syslinux-3.72) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 05:00:11 -0000 Steven Kreuzer wrote: > when you do a make install for the mtools port, it does not prompt you > if you would like to build the port without X11. I think enough users have expressed the opinion (which I share) that it would be reasonable to add an OPTION to this effect. We're fairly well into the era where users expect that significant build options will be presented in the OPTIONS menu, and this certainly qualifies. As to your other suggestion, I don't see anything wrong with a -without-gui version of the port, but I think that rather than copying/forking the port it would work best as a master/slave version. If I (or better yet, someone else :) ) can find the time to add a without-gui slave port do you have any objections to the mtools port being modified for use as a master, and having the OPTION added? Doug