From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu Jul 24 12:19:25 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA18738
          for questions-outgoing; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 12:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dumbwinter (mod1.logic.it [195.120.151.17])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA18727
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 12:19:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by dumbwinter (Smail3.1.29.1 #1)
	id m0wrTPa-00005MC; Thu, 24 Jul 97 21:18 MET DST
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 21:18:53 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Marco Molteni <molter@logic.it>
X-Sender: molter@dumbwinter.ecomotor.it
To: questions@freebsd.org
Subject: RE: Apache and Ports Policies in General
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970724113344.6895A-100000@ccsales.ccsales.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970724211222.679A-100000@dumbwinter.ecomotor.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

The following happened to me with more than a port:

What I like about ports is that they take care of many things you could 
not know, eg a particular flag to pass to the compiler.

What I don't like is that _they_ choose all the options in the 
application Makefile.

I'd like something like:
1. make patch from freebsd Makefile
2. let _me_ edit the patched application Makefile
2. make install from freebsd Makefile

Marco Molteni
Computer Science student at the Universita' di Milano, Italy.
"The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things".