Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 23:43:19 +0200 From: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> To: Sideris Michael <msid@daemons.gr> Cc: Gary Jennejohn <garyj@jennejohn.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports structure and improvement suggestions Message-ID: <20060508214319.GA21378@owl.midgard.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20060508213035.GA73976@daemons.gr> References: <20060508205703.GA11215@daemons.gr> <200605082120.k48LKxSi006193@peedub.jennejohn.org> <20060508213035.GA73976@daemons.gr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:30:35AM +0300, Sideris Michael wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 11:20:59PM +0200, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > > > > Sideris Michael writes: > > > > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:47:51PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > > > No one is taking away any rights. > > > > > > Of course. That's why every ports should have a configuration panel. > > > > > > > Wrong. I do not intend to convert any of my ports to use OPTIONS so > > don't bother sending me patches. Many ports are so simple that adding > > a configuration panel would be totally unnnecessary and ridiculous. > > So, if you have 10 of this ports as dependencies, you prefer go seperately > to each port directory and search through the Makefile to find what KNOBS > it provides. Nice. Even for ports that do use the OPTIONS framework you often have to search through the Makefiles anyway to find out exactly what each option actually does. Using OPTIONS will not gain you much in this regard. -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060508214319.GA21378>