Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 09:16:33 +0100 From: Stijn Hoop <stijn@win.tue.nl> To: Michael Nottebrock <lofi@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, nork@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Integrated DEBUG related macros to WITH_DEBUG/WITHOUT_DEBUG Message-ID: <20051113081633.GD69544@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> In-Reply-To: <200511130900.24801.lofi@freebsd.org> References: <200511130038.jAD0cgLb043746@sakura.ninth-nine.com> <200511130900.24801.lofi@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--oTHb8nViIGeoXxdp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 09:00:21AM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote: > I don't think it's a good idea at all to unify all debug knobs=20 > into one universal WITH/WITHOUT_DEBUG - it requires the user to use a thi= rd=20 > party portmanager utilitiy or fiddling with conditionals in make.conf if = he=20 > wants debug symbols on specific ports only. Well that goes for the other knobs as well of course -- WITH_PERL, WITH_PYTHON and other programming extension languages come to mind, as do NOPORTDOCS and WITHOUT_GUI (there are some things that I don't need a GUI for on my desktop). My verdict is that the unification of the knob name outweighs the expense of having to use conditionals in make.conf or equivalent. --Stijn --=20 Light travels faster than sound. That's why some people appear bright until you hear them speak. --oTHb8nViIGeoXxdp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDdvZhY3r/tLQmfWcRAiYIAJ9jWemz0zoz7oWkJ1SODLFPFr5RxgCghfV8 +4sg6k5o8ppZjgPNmVx49wE= =nYhx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oTHb8nViIGeoXxdp--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051113081633.GD69544>