From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 10 16:10:36 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6B5F8A for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 16:10:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@grem.de) Received: from mail.grem.de (outcast.grem.de [213.239.217.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D50328FC16 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 16:10:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 43051 invoked by uid 89); 10 Oct 2012 16:10:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bsd64.grem.de) (mg@grem.de@80.190.102.230) by mail.grem.de with ESMTPA; 10 Oct 2012 16:10:32 -0000 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 18:10:32 +0200 From: Michael Gmelin To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HAVE_GNOME vs. bsd.ports.options.mk Message-ID: <20121010181032.720d359f@bsd64.grem.de> In-Reply-To: References: <20121010121850.039fb6d2@bsd64.grem.de> <20121010102527.GB26497@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20121010123322.0677a829@bsd64.grem.de> <20121010105757.GD26497@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20121010124938.3e77bb12@bsd64.grem.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: lists@eitanadler.com X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 16:10:36 -0000 On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:59:03 -0400 Eitan Adler wrote: > On 10 October 2012 06:49, Michael Gmelin wrote: > ... > I had that turned on by default to make sure > > the port behaves exactly like it did before conversion to OptionsNG > > (it's not my lawn, you know). > > Hehe, this is good thing. Normally you want to try to replicate > existing behavior. > > > The committer changed that to be off by > > default, since this is a better solution for package building and I > > agree with him. > > But... in this case the previous behavior was "buggy" so it had to be > changed. That's why I agree with him, it was the right thing to do. Ah.. I just realized "he" was you, so yes, I totally agree with you that this was the right thing to do and as a committer you're in the position to do that. It wouldn't have been appropriate to change this myself though, since I claimed to do a conversion, which wouldn't have been correct otherwise. > > > Also note that there are a lot of ports that use either techniques > > for auto detection (e.g. checking for the existence of libraries to > > bring in functionality) and that those should be covered as well - > > simply not allowing auto detection will massively reduce > > functionality, so using an OPTION to allow it might be the way to > > go. I think AUTODETECT might > > I agree. > > > P.S. I never did properly thank you for all those OptionsNG PRs. Most > of them went in without any changes at all, which is unusual. Thanks! > > You're welcome :) -- Michael Gmelin