Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 09:30:25 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Anders Nordby <anders@fix.no>, Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net>, Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>, Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG>, andreas@FreeBSD.ORG, eric@cybernut.com, ijliao@FreeBSD.ORG, jdp@FreeBSD.ORG, jdp@polstra.com, jmz@FreeBSD.ORG, jseger@FreeBSD.ORG, keith@FreeBSD.ORG, knu@FreeBSD.ORG, lioux@FreeBSD.ORG, matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org, mi@aldan.algebra.com, nectar@FreeBSD.ORG, nobutaka@nobutaka.com, ozz@FreeBSD.org.ru, sam@inf.enst.fr, shige@FreeBSD.ORG, trevor@FreeBSD.ORG, yatt@msc.biglobe.ne.jp, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: WITHOUT_X vs. WITHOUT_X11 vs. NO_X Message-ID: <20010604093025.A84595@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20010604131416.A90338@totem.fix.no>; from anders@fix.no on Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 01:14:17PM %2B0200 References: <15127.62143.888966.869172@guru.mired.org> <7782.991637382@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> <20010604131416.A90338@totem.fix.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 01:14:17PM +0200, Anders Nordby wrote: > I disagree. I think X11 better identifies what we are disabling support > for than just X. X can be anything. Then NO_X in the base system is bad? > WITHOUT_X11 was also the consensus last time the discussion was on > -ports, and I think -doc folks should adhere to that. It isn't what "the -doc folks should adhear to". I am looking for an excutive decision from on high (ie, portmgr). I will personally change make.conf.5 as soon as they declare what it shall be. 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?20010604093025.A84595>