Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 04 Jun 2012 15:28:24 -0700
From:      Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD ports list <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: NO_OPTIONS_SORT makes options disappear
Message-ID:  <4FCD3688.7070000@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120604222215.GH73254@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
References:  <4FCD1EC7.9060905@FreeBSD.org> <20120604222215.GH73254@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 06/04/2012 15:22, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 01:47:03PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> The new options framework sorts all of the options by default
>> before presenting them to the user. I have mixed feelings about
>> this, however there is supposed to be a workaround for those of
>> us who have grouped the options for our ports into logical
>> chunks, NO_OPTIONS_SORT.
>> 
>> Today I tried defining that in my BIND ports so that users would
>> not be confused during the upgrade process, and got this:
>> 
>> make config ===> No options to configure
>> 
>> I tried defining NO_OPTIONS_SORT both before and after including 
>> bsd.port.pre.mk, got the same result for both.

> Have you tried keeping you port as-is

I left it as-is since I don't have time to do anything else. This
results in a bad user experience since the options are now all sorted
into alphabetical order instead of the meaningful groupings that I had
them in.

> or converting it ?

I don't have time to do that right now, and this should not be
necessary in order to maintain backwards compatibility with what I
already had. I can accept adding the NO_OPTIONS_SORT knob, but the
fact that adding it causes things to be dramatically more broken than
they already are is a bug.

> Can you send me a diff so that I can have a deeper look tomorrow
> morning GMT+1?

I described what I did in detail in my OP. Adding NO_OPTIONS_SORT was
the only change I made.

Doug

- -- 

    This .signature sanitized for your protection
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJPzTaIAAoJEFzGhvEaGryEOuUH/2WcSn0Wn8xMoUzhIJBm2x2Z
Axog5WoLoL/uuddijCsAQyQlG4OxYaatMvIPBg2kImqZDdZV0wDvrp/vcg3vngYX
zvq2kpzfc0y8BT01UWi6BNGJXymDHZ0/b8NKv7pYrUWvTLta4Ae8wxtxZciGsAVL
ITMFXygIDhu8KWtWmfakP5bJpwexz+v20M1CoKhBWJ8FuawcicZctOscbUCYn4HE
KK4kYcmO/sb8C5n8aCehJXQbcZX77wftSDUatfNpv8WTxyDPzKpms3SwmfOUIMnd
XSnh4O4eiyIccPk9OCE4EMOmizlJhBxMpgEPp6a0QeAwmWaYA09dTiyhbexXcXQ=
=FlRt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FCD3688.7070000>