From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 12 19:20:19 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79CE216A41B for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:20:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: from mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.9]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5649713C4A5 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:20:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: (qmail 22264 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2007 19:20:13 -0000 Received: from april.chuckr.org (chuckr@[66.92.151.30]) (envelope-sender ) by mail7.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 12 Nov 2007 19:20:13 -0000 Message-ID: <4738A71A.6060100@chuckr.org> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:18:50 -0500 From: Chuck Robey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071107 SeaMonkey/1.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: RW References: <2852884D-270A-4879-B960-C10A602E080E@ashleymoran.me.uk> <47387891.2060007@unsane.co.uk> <47387BCA.6080604@foster.cc> <20071112183502.438b44b8@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <20071112183502.438b44b8@gumby.homeunix.com.> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports with GUI configs X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:20:19 -0000 RW wrote: > On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:14:02 -0800 > "Mark D. Foster" wrote: > >> Vince wrote: >>> Ashley Moran wrote: >>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I was just wondering, what is the motivation behind the GUI >>>> configuration for some ports? Simply put, they drive me up the >>>> wall. I've lost count of the number of times I've come back to a >>>> big install to find it hanging on a config screen. Possibly I'm >>>> missing something. >>> I agree though, I often suffer the same problem, coming back after >>> a few hours to a build that should have finished to find its >>> sitting on the first dependency. >>> >> Maybe it's been suggested before (in which case I add my vote) but a >> timeout mechanism would solve this... give the user 10s to provide a >> keypress else bailout and use the "default" options. >> > > That would involve standing-over the build for hours or days in case > you miss a 10-second window - it's just not practical IMO. > > > Setting the menus is pretty easy to script, and you can also set BATCH > to take the default options A suggestion I recently made on the ports list would, as a side effect, make a better solution. You see, allowing a default timer does get things built, but then it allows no user input to let users avoid installing software that they either have no ise for, or do not want for other reasons. I have enough input now, so I'm going ahead and coding up the Makefile mods to allow my system, but it looks somewhat like the Gentoo Portage "USE" flags system. Not identical, and I am only proposing to use their USE flags, not the rest (I very much like using Makefiles as FreeBSD ports does, and wouldn't change that.) If you want to see what it is, go look at recent postings on ports list. It'll probably get changed, as I get something for folks to look at and discuss.