Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 22:38:07 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Anonymous <swell.k@gmail.com> Cc: David DEMELIER <demelier.david@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Ports <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>, Christopher Key <cjk32@cam.ac.uk> Subject: Re: OPTIONS Message-ID: <20101006053807.GD41180@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <864od08oqg.fsf@gmail.com> References: <4C93AA31.5080202@DataIX.net> <AANLkTik%2B1rvY4ZYgzHRjaX8PBfD1UqNCNeadHqg3KBfo@mail.gmail.com> <20100918223933.GB85995@dragon.NUXI.org> <AANLkTi=vPKpaPL9L=pQN9EdWdEN3sf1pos6uGtJU7ybV@mail.gmail.com> <20101002002605.GA8018@dragon.NUXI.org> <AANLkTinkasFFQ8ssbTSdbYUS%2BJ-tYMc1U3w9rkUCk9Gd@mail.gmail.com> <864od08oqg.fsf@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 10:43:19PM +0400, Anonymous wrote: > David DEMELIER <demelier.david@gmail.com> writes: > > I agree with this inconsistency, I think with a little of work OPTIONS > > framework should be to follow KNOB to enable an option if it's already > > defined by the user. This would be great for people that use > > WITHOUT_GNOME, WITHOUT_X11 and so on. I think it's possible to do it. > > I think Chris solved this one in the thread > http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C476F69.1060200 Unless this was also submitted as a PR -- I doubt it will ever get in. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org) Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is top-posting (putting a reply at the top of the message) frowned upon? Let's not play "Jeopardy-style quoting"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101006053807.GD41180>