Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 23:48:03 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Michael Scheidell <scheidell@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] New framework options aka optionng Message-ID: <20120530214803.GD85232@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <4FC69352.4000702@FreeBSD.org> References: <4301C0E3-3C53-46E2-B5A5-7BD120CD775F@FreeBSD.org> <4FC5F794.9050506@gmail.com> <4FC68FC0.1010707@FreeBSD.org> <CAN6yY1tp2-n1DGq6=uT2bVo-sAqP8bwYj%2BL9OG_zNKm=vpejEQ@mail.gmail.com> <4FC69352.4000702@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--NklN7DEeGtkPCoo3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:38:26PM -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 5/30/12 5:33 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote: > >> 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. > > --=20 > for our commercial systems, we don't install man, docs, examples. > and, I would suspect that I would be a little peeved if next time I=20 > recompile all the ports, I had to stop and hit 'WITHOUT_PORTDOCS,=20 > WITHOUT_PORTEXAMPLES' on every port. >=20 > Upward compatibility folks, if at all possible. >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Michael Scheidell, CTO > >*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation > d: +1.561.948.2259 > w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" echo "OPTIONS_UNSET+=3D DOCS" >> /etc/make.conf echo "NO_DIALOG=3Dyes" >> /etc/make.conf having NOPORTSDOC and NOPORTEXAMPLES, KNOBS and OPTIONS has been a constant demand by lots of users that is why I wrote it that way and merged NOPORTDO= CS and NOPORTEXAMPLES and WITHOUT_NLS btw to optionsng, I may be wrong, if tha= t is the case please speak loudly, saying why, what would be best what do you ex= pect. Keep in mind that currently lots of ports already define OPTIONS only conce= rning documentation, also note that some DOCS might bring some heavy depencies li= ke doxygen. Last but not least, by chance (for once I'm happy with chance :)) you do not have to add DOCS or EXAMPLES to OPTIONS_DEFINE to be able to use them in yo= ur ports! So you can use it just like NOPORTDOCS and NOPORTEXAMPLES use to wor= k. IE without and make config needed. that mean a single way to define/check for it but 2 different kind of optio= ns. Not sure this mail is clear :) regards, Bapt --NklN7DEeGtkPCoo3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk/GlZMACgkQ8kTtMUmk6ExsCACgqAW/stexghQrsynJ7LmFMZQh FioAnjsayHsUNIREV+FJVAIjwwKV2Rln =cW2e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --NklN7DEeGtkPCoo3--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120530214803.GD85232>