Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 18:54:31 -0500 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: Bill Moran <wmoran@iowna.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Evil ports! Message-ID: <15122.58679.408250.974251@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <28573720@toto.iv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bill Moran <wmoran@iowna.com> types: > "David S. Geirsson" wrote: > > Erhm... no, it isn't. For example, the editor "jed" doesn't require X. > > However, it is packaged with xjed, which is an X frontend. IIRC you had to > > change a #define in the makefile to disable xjed. > Understood. I'd be curious to know how many ports fit into that > category. Grep through the Makefiles, looking for things that build WITHOUT_X or WITHOUT_X11 or similar. It seems that the author of the jed port - unlike the author of the vim and emacs ports - didn't bother implementing that switch. > See my other post regarding researching software before installing. Also see mine on how to fix it so that your system *never* tries to install X. It's pretty trivial. > Also, when you consider all the sofware that someone could complain > should have a global variable like that, the magnitude of iplementing > such a system, let alone maintaining it, gets considerable. It's clearly smaller than the effort needed to implement the ports we already have. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15122.58679.408250.974251>