Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 11:57:27 -0400 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: marino@freebsd.org Cc: "svn-ports-head@freebsd.org" <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-ports-all@freebsd.org" <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@freebsd.org>, Andrej Zverev <az@freebsd.org>, "ports-committers@freebsd.org" <ports-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r367002 - head/devel/cmake Message-ID: <1C547D2C-011A-41A6-AA9D-891A056DD87A@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <5405E675.1090509@marino.st> References: <201409021339.s82DdX36038975@svn.freebsd.org> <A80106E3-30CD-4B45-859E-2F96BD1264FF@adamw.org> <CAD5bB%2BiLj%2BaHOHH1R-4ZXVj=JPMdnxe04C6w50WjHsVFe6Hnsw@mail.gmail.com> <5405E33B.3040906@marino.st> <EBCC13BE-C282-4072-AAE4-A2CB6AD91EAC@adamw.org> <5405E50B.1030100@marino.st> <30FDC48D-0DF1-4EBA-918D-878048101E21@adamw.org> <5405E675.1090509@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2 Sep, 2014, at 11:47, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> wrote: > On 9/2/2014 17:42, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> On 2 Sep, 2014, at 11:40, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> >>>>> I understand that installing man pages is mandatory, that it >>>>> should not be OPTION controlled. A lot of ports use sphinx so >>>>> I don't know what the big deal about sphinx in particular is, >>>>> but lets say it's something else far worse. man pages could >>>>> be pregenerated and installed from $FILEDIR right? So there >>>>> are alternatives, but unless I'm wrong about the policy using >>>>> OPTIONS is not one of them (but I'm wrong a lot, so let's see >>>>> what the answer is). >>>>=20 >>>> How do you mean mandatory? >>>>=20 >>>> OPTIONS_DEFINE+=3D MANPAGES OPTIONS_DEFAULT+=3D MANPAGES=20 >>>> MANPAGES_CONFIGURE_ON=3D --sphinx-man >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> By mandatory, I mean that a port that does that is violating >>> policy. Documentation is optional (DOCS) but manpages are not. >>> That's what I've understood. I've see ports that tried the above >>> and I've removed code of that equivalent. >>>=20 >>> John >>=20 >> If it=92s on by default I don=92t see the problem. Who are we to = decide >> that nobody should ever be allowed to build a port without manpages? >>=20 >=20 > If it's the policy, it's the policy. That=92s ridiculous. Where=92s that policy? There=92s MANPAGES_DESC in = bsd.options.desc.mk. I=92m not the first person to think up disabling = manpages. 80 ports have a MANPAGES option. Should I let all 80 of those = maintainers know that you decided they can=92t have that option anymore? > However, I sorta kinda think a <bsd.port.mk> option to not package man > pages for all ports may be coming for embedded usage. That won't = solve > this dependency that you are trying to fix, but it will solve the "i > don't need manpages for any port" issue. >=20 > Sphinx is not like tex though. It's really not a big deal practically > speaking. Bringing in a dozen dependencies is EXACTLY what options is designed = for. # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org http://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1C547D2C-011A-41A6-AA9D-891A056DD87A>