From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 30 21:33:37 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E2B1065676; Wed, 30 May 2012 21:33:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kob6558@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 693A88FC0C; Wed, 30 May 2012 21:33:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibhj8 with SMTP id hj8so3450692wib.13 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 14:33:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VAMQEfXs5pnERGx1w2sy8wiJJi0QrDWCSTEvk0IdzEQ=; b=Rb6M/SmQiLE4hj1fHamx2FCj8CGMdgFL/4QT5wXWjpZgMvJ2DWXNwqiIY9qlGZ3eZr DXQmGPiKhtWU9tw2XKgIJwP15YlLXvY2X7rmYo9WbMEng859a2WLZqHk73TNZNSPyH7d tMRnMMi4ONvkL6F/WcE3jDi5g+thxnaqMf8CSTeYIdBxDdaNHDqKS9IHrQiblKKgCvOS 6s/NMp0r9z8ssMjnNCrZXcuuGaIHpN4g/J9eGjC/Kup64KkAGvvzV6siUg3oshLD+OIQ 3nEAOu7mgWIYerAkUTcpdoNlXp8zsU++Rs7v19sr7uhzJvoR7PAHw1p4sNuFSYg6/FcU Iozg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.145.13 with SMTP id o13mr11305083wej.95.1338413597751; Wed, 30 May 2012 14:33:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.155.4 with HTTP; Wed, 30 May 2012 14:33:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4FC68FC0.1010707@FreeBSD.org> References: <4301C0E3-3C53-46E2-B5A5-7BD120CD775F@FreeBSD.org> <4FC5F794.9050506@gmail.com> <4FC68FC0.1010707@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 14:33:17 -0700 Message-ID: From: Kevin Oberman To: Doug Barton Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Vitaly Magerya Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] New framework options aka optionng 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: Wed, 30 May 2012 21:33:37 -0000 On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > On 5/30/2012 3:33 AM, Vitaly Magerya wrote: >> Folks, when moving forward with optionsng, do we want to convert >> NOPORTDOCS and NOPORTEXAMPLES to options everywhere? > > Absolutely not. By far the majority of users benefit from installing the > docs and examples. Users who don't want them can continue to do what > they've always done, configure it in make.conf. Adding OPTIONS for these > would only cause confusion. I'll go one further and suggest that the vast majority who don't want these features are building specialized systems and they know very well what they are doing. A global setting for these would be desirable, though, as someone building a specialized distribution for, say, an embedded system, will want no docs or examples for any port. I suspect it is ALMOST always an all or nothing issue, not per port. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer E-mail: kob6558@gmail.com