Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 7 Jun 2003 22:05:20 +0200
From:      Clement Laforet <sheepkiller@cultdeadsheep.org>
To:        Mike Patterson <mpatters@cs.uwaterloo.ca>
Cc:        ports@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Build options question
Message-ID:  <20030607220520.2ee084ec.sheepkiller@cultdeadsheep.org>
In-Reply-To: <1055014959.38199.2.camel@comrie>
References:  <1055014959.38199.2.camel@comrie>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07 Jun 2003 15:42:41 -0400
Mike Patterson <mpatters@cs.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:

> At the risk of starting another bikeshed discussion: is it generally
> preferred that ports with many options disable those options by
> default, or enable them?
> 
> I ask because I'm preparing to update deskutils/logjam2 to the new
> release version, and last version I made it disable the extra stuff
> (XMMS music detection, using gtkhtml, etc) by default, but I'm
> wondering if that's the preferred behaviour.

Hi Mike,

IMHO, it depends to port. The best way to make a "multi options end-user
desktop port" is mplayer port (i.e. autodetect and messages to notify
available non-selected/detected knobs).
Default options (i.e. for packages building) are your choice.
Personnaly, I would choose more useful/common options.

I just have a look at your port, I think the best way is a "mplayer-like ports".

That's all folks :)

Regards,


clem



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030607220520.2ee084ec.sheepkiller>