From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 9 11:36:51 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8480816A4BF; Tue, 9 Sep 2003 11:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.bayarea.net [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32BB543FE0; Tue, 9 Sep 2003 11:36:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h89IaejR035181; Tue, 9 Sep 2003 11:36:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@ns1.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h89Iadtl035180; Tue, 9 Sep 2003 11:36:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 11:36:39 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <20030909183639.GA35128@ns1.xcllnt.net> References: <20030905.183837.116096286.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030909153039.GA942@rot13.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030909153039.GA942@rot13.obsecurity.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i cc: deischen@freebsd.org cc: DougB@freebsd.org cc: "M. Warner Losh" cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: NO_FOO knobs in make.conf X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 18:36:51 -0000 On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 08:30:40AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 04:42:12AM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote: > > > > > In message: <20030905140628.H90946@12-234-22-23.pyvrag.nggov.pbz> > > > Doug Barton writes: > > > : Once we get general consensus (not universal agreement :) on this, I'll > > > : take responsibility for marshaling the aforementioned volunteer > > > : resources. > > > > > > I'd just do it. we've already talked this to death. Lots of people > > > want it, some don't. Every time we talk about it, that's the > > > outcome. Let's just do it and get on with our lives. > > > > Or change all the NO*, NO_* to WANT_* and default them to yes. > > That would be inconsistent with the ports tree. Except xemacs, which uses WANT_GTK as a user knob :-) -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net