Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:57:16 +0100
From:      "Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@corecode.ath.cx>
To:        Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        jeh@FreeBSD.ORG, mi@aldan.algebra.com, joseph@randomnetworks.com, lioux@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/www Makefile ports/www/frontpage-es  Makefiledistinfo pkg-comment
Message-ID:  <20011229155716.37dfba55.corecode@corecode.ath.cx>
In-Reply-To: <1009610598.225.7.camel@notebook>
References:  <200112282206.fBSM6kf36064@aldan.algebra.com> <1009581412.225.2.camel@notebook> <3C2D18FB.855F80EC@FreeBSD.org> <1009610598.225.7.camel@notebook>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=.J'O0cQMNve'Eg8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 29 Dec 2001 09:25:54 +0200 Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote:

[...]
> 
> Yes, I think that something like that would be useful, but for this
> proposal to be practically useable there should be a way for bento
> scripts to do auto-discovery of the available options for each port,
> otherwise there will be too much trouble each time some new option is
> introduced. Following is how I see it:
> 
> 1. Each port that supports "options" declares variable PORTOPTIONS in
> its Makefile, which is the list of all supported build-time options.
> For example:
> 
> PORTOPTIONS=	WITH_FOO WITHOUT_BAR
> 
> The Makefile obviously should recognize those options, enable/disable
> approprite features, set sensible PKGNAMESUFFIXes, etc.
> 
> 2. When building packages on bento, the script tests if the
> PORTOPTIONS is defined and if yes, then repeats the build of the port
> several times(3 times in the example above - first without any
> options, second with WITH_FOO defined and third - with WITHOUT_BAR).
> As a result, there should be 3 packages with different suffixes.

actually there should be 4 packages: standard, +foo, -bar, +foo-bar

> This is a quite "raw" proposal just off the top of the top of my head
> and I know that there are several drawbacks - for example there is no
> way to separate those options that are mutually exclusive from those
> that aren't. Also, ideally there should be a way to automatically
> present user with a dialog to select from the list of available
> options.

this is indeed a good idea and i've been thinking about some kind of
this a while now. if there is a way to:
o set all possilbe permutations (can be very much)
o set all "reasonable" permutations
o except the mutually exclusive permutations (could result in too much  
packages tho)

also, if the chosen options (in gereral, whilst building) are recorded
in the package description in /var/db/ there is a easy way to
automatically portupgrade without having to worry about missed options.
and, yes, a dialog would be _really_ nice (and one hadn't to look into
the makefile everytime one builds a port to see which options are
available)

my .02¤

corecode


-- 
/"\   http://corecode.ath.cx/
\ /
 \     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
/ \  Against HTML Mail and News

--=.J'O0cQMNve'Eg8
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE8LdnQr5S+dk6z85oRAm4bAJ94O+wWKvDCf8cp2VXQknTwWde6ewCdEcC9
U82/491n8VA90M0gONW/lPs=
=v4Hd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=.J'O0cQMNve'Eg8--


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011229155716.37dfba55.corecode>