Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 03:08:08 -0800 From: Garrett Cooper <gcooper@FreeBSD.org> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>, pav@freebsd.org, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, freebsd-sysinstall@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposed OPTIONS replacement Message-ID: <AANLkTi=KpPVUdLeDd5g_c=HH7wRUFOHVK5KYP8=kJ7=C@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim7AYUN%2BpNKQuY%2BC9yGLviRccjx7vc9hELmLymm@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTikV4nCaZeFH-OEq94LXHikibitcyv%2BVPnGH8TFt@mail.gmail.com> <4CD4602C.2080804@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTi=9-tgiH2QH7wODncG8D9aw_z2guSUNQK_pajkF@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimJS%2Bd-h6ub6Q_Ff7vX134exr-7s73o=%2BjY4af%2B@mail.gmail.com> <20101108084958.000042be@unknown> <AANLkTimzD0LjO%2BzCg1iPu2RzF7UF=pQkmMcHnMbx1jQd@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTim7AYUN%2BpNKQuY%2BC9yGLviRccjx7vc9hELmLymm@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> wrote: > Hi, > > the problem with libdialog, is that it doesn't have features we need > for the ports infrastructure. > > With libdialog it is not possible to mix radio button and "normal" > button and for the options framework we need the be able to get the > following feature imho: > > simple options: check box > exclusive options: radio button > exclusive options if a simple option is check (for example option X11 > allow to choose between the following options QT3 QT4 GTK etc) > group options: a user can check choose between 0-N options (check box) > if a other options is activated example a port can be build with 2 or > more gui toolkit at the same time: avidemux for example > group options with at least one options checked (1-N). > > As far as I've looked into libdialog it is nearly impossible to handle > in a simple (I may be wrong and missed some part of libdialog) > > Other choices will be : > 1/ create a ncurses tool dedicated for the ports as Eitan began to do > it (thanks for that :)) (this is my favorite choice) > 2/ there is libndialog which BSDL unfortunately 4 clause BSDL (may be > the author will accept to change it to a 3 or 2 clause BSDL), which is > very closed to libdialog and allow to write easily more complexe ui. > So that we could rewrite a dialog compatible tool extended with more > complexe UI dedicated to the ports (similat to Eitan work). > (http://www.pell.portland.or.us/~orc/Code/ndialog/dialog.html, > https://github.com/Orc/ndialog) the latest version from github > compiles fine on freebsd, the work to port sysinstall and sade to > libndialog is pretty easy, if this is direction we take, I can manage > porting all the tools that depend on libdialog in base to ndialog. There's also option 3, which is: a. Use the code posted up at http://invisible-island.net/dialog/ (GPLed like our copy in base, but whatev). b. Implement the missing features there. c. Contribute back to someone who's actively working on libdialog. I'm just of the opinion that there's little value in BSD licensed libdialog to be honest *shrugs*... Thanks! -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTi=KpPVUdLeDd5g_c=HH7wRUFOHVK5KYP8=kJ7=C>