Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2000 15:12:49 -0500 (EST) From: Will Andrews <andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM> To: Karl Denninger <karl@Denninger.Net> Cc: Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/15822: Update port misc/HomeDaemon to V0.99 Message-ID: <XFMail.000101151249.andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM> In-Reply-To: <20000101133551.A7428@Denninger.Net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01-Jan-00 Karl Denninger wrote: > I did. That was the followup you didn't respond to. Hmm, I must have missed it. I'm sorry about that. :\ > The entire litany of how it works and why is in the README file (along with > more detail than most people want on this stuff) A simple explanation would have sufficed, or just saying what you said here would also have sufficed. :) >> If you have a compile-time switch, couldn't you allow an override through a >> runtime switch (like through getopt())? Just another thought. > > Getting it set wrong fails in a fairly subtle way and there is no way to test > it on start-up, so there's no way to KNOW you have it wrong other than some > really screwy things happening (in particular, with the RAMP command). > > Once I got the report of trouble I was able to identify why it was > happening relatively quickly, but the guy who reported it had no idea - > and, I might add, the problem was flooding his powerline with repeated > commands that were doing nothing. Not good at all. > > Putting a command-line switch in there is asking for it. Yes, I could, > but I'm not convinced that its a good idea. Dan Lancini's driver still > has to be compiled by the user, so forcing them to compile and THIS (as > opposed to loading it as a package) is not really onerous - you can't USE > this package without Dan's (at least not for anything X10 related) so > there is little incentive to do that. Well, that's an issue that's for you to decide.. my jurisdiction is done at this point.. I really have no other <sarcasm> astute </sarcasm> points of view to present. :) > If you're not "up enough on things" to compile the package you're not > going to be using it anyway. No, but if I see something somebody else _MIGHT_ have missed, there's no reason not to speak up.. > That, by the way, is why the PLIST stuff is nonsense in this particular > case - packaging the port is pretty worthless as it stands, since you > have a dependancy that I can't rationally include AND that dependancy > is NOT AVAILABLE in a binary format. PLISTs are used with ports too ; that's how you `make deinstall', after all. >> You can, if you are just going to reply in conversational form, just use >> your >> reply function in your MUA. There's really no reason to use that "submit >> followup" form Steve suggested, but it's there. > > Assuming the conversation takes place in somewhat-close-to-real-time, that's > reasonable. If it doesn't the old message will likely be gone from my mail > spool. <humorously> But only if you delete it. <grin> </humorously> -- Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com> GCS/E/S @d- s+:+>+:- a--->+++ C++ UB++++ P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++>++++ DI+++ D+ G++>+++ e->++++ h! r-->+++ y? 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?XFMail.000101151249.andrews>