Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 16:11:36 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-xfce@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/sysutils/xfce4-utils Makefile Message-ID: <4EEFD2B8.1050006@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CADLo838TKwEZwLfXsAYmXowKweM8MiC5=BT5NFGyegWyubcX=A@mail.gmail.com> References: <201112181751.pBIHpivv027591@repoman.freebsd.org> <4EEF0AF1.20501@FreeBSD.org> <CADLo838TKwEZwLfXsAYmXowKweM8MiC5=BT5NFGyegWyubcX=A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/19/2011 02:03, Chris Rees wrote: > > On 19 Dec 2011 09:59, "Doug Barton" <dougb@freebsd.org > <mailto:dougb@freebsd.org>> wrote: >> >> Thanks, that's 1/3 of the job done. :) The problem is that the current >> OPTION creates the false idea that the only way you can lock your screen >> is to use xlockmore. >> >> Perhaps you missed my followup where I mentioned that the next step >> would be to add an OPTION for xscreensaver as well, and the logic to >> avoid having them both defined. > > I'll look at that later. Thanks. In answer to your question avoiding having both enabled would be nice since it avoids duplicate, unnecessary redundancy. >> Better yet would be to detect if one or the other is already installed, >> and default the OPTIONS accordingly. > > Autodetection in ports? No thanks! I didn't suggest autodetecting for the dependencies, I suggested it for the OPTIONS. That's been done for a long time, and ideally should be how it's always done. Doug -- [^L] Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EEFD2B8.1050006>