Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:57:14 +0200 From: Jose M Rodriguez <josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, obrien@freebsd.org Cc: Sebastian Schulze Struchtrup <seb@struchtrup.com> Subject: Re: alternative options for ports Message-ID: <200410132257.15432.josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> In-Reply-To: <20041013193432.GA53895@hub.freebsd.org> References: <416C0DE8.3000004@struchtrup.com> <20041013123840.GB1301@FreeBSD.org> <20041013193432.GA53895@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
El Mi=E9rcoles, 13 de Octubre de 2004 21:34, David O'Brien escribi=F3:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 12:38:40PM +0000, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 03:51:01PM -0400, Frank Laszlo wrote:
> > > I personally do not like dialog's in ports, period. It makes
> > > unattended builds a pain, mostly when compiling large ports with
> > > an extensive list of depends, you never know which dependency is
> > > going to pop up a dialog in the middle of an all-night build.
>
> Hear, hear!
> [...]
>
> OPTIONS isn't the answer -- they don't do anything for 'pkg_add -r'
> users. Since we go to a *lot* of work building packages and making
> them available there must be a huge number of consumers of them. We
> should be making more port variations. vim-gtk, vim-kde, vim-athena,
> vim-motif for instance. That way a pkg_add user and get what they
> want.
And is anyone working in a kinda of ${LOCALBASE}/etc/pkg_add.subr? I=20
see a lot of pkg_install scripts doing near the same things.
=2D-
josemi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200410132257.15432.josemi>