Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 23:03:08 +0200 From: Danny Pansters <danny@ricin.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: Pav Lucistnik <pav@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: OPTIONS improvement Message-ID: <200704042303.09002.danny@ricin.com> In-Reply-To: <1175719008.91901.5.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> References: <20070403051207.GW3330@svm.csie.ntu.edu.tw> <4612DAC9.1090505@sa2c.net> <1175719008.91901.5.camel@ikaros.oook.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 22:36:48 Pav Lucistnik wrote: > NIIMI Satoshi p=C3=AD=C5=A1e v st 04. 04. 2007 v 07:52 +0900: > > On 2007/04/03 14:12, Rong-En Fan wrote: > > > After pav@'s commit to bsd.port.mk, now you can test WITH/WITHOUT > > > freely with OPTIONS. > > > > I filed a PR ports/78343 with similar patch, but the PR was rejected. > > Why the policy has been changed? > > Guess we're two years smarter now. > > People kept doing it wrong way even when we repeatedly told them how to > do it. In the end, it's probably easier to fix the infrastructure :) Wise. Though I now have to unlearn the one-true-way ;-) Any chance you feel inspired to also make a provision for mutually exclusiv= e=20 options (like radiobuttons)? That would be very useful IMO. Someone pointed= =20 me to a PR some time ago that did just that. Cheers, Dan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200704042303.09002.danny>