Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 16:02:38 -0500 From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@chuckr.org> To: Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu> Cc: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports with GUI configs Message-ID: <4738BF6E.6050902@chuckr.org> In-Reply-To: <4738ACDD.50108@u.washington.edu> References: <2852884D-270A-4879-B960-C10A602E080E@ashleymoran.me.uk> <47387891.2060007@unsane.co.uk> <47387BCA.6080604@foster.cc> <20071112183502.438b44b8@gumby.homeunix.com.> <4738A71A.6060100@chuckr.org> <4738ACDD.50108@u.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garrett Cooper wrote: >> If you want to see what it is, go look at recent postings on ports >> list. It'll probably get changed, as I get something for folks to >> look at and discuss. > > USE flags are a pain in the ass (former Gentoo user of 3 years). > Introducing that type of complexity into a ports system isn't necessary > and does unexpected things at times for end-users when developers change > variable names or behavior, which happened quite often with Gentoo. > make config-all or something similar to have people fill in their > desired config info in all of the ncurses config sections would however > be a much better idea I think.. > -Garrett Good point. My main drive is to stop asking users to OK dependencies to specific pieces of software (which most users haven't the least idea about), and also to move the gathering of data out of ports-compile-time and into system-install-time (perhaps with an update feature as hardware changes). The way that Gentoo did it, if followed slavishly, yes, I agree it would just leaad to more confusion. I got the feeling that you are asking for a ncurses sort of app, that would gather data, and tjhen be used to control the setting of dependencies? Is that right? I would think that the linkage between the program amd the ports could be a list like the Gentoo USE lists, but without any direct interface to it, so building and maintaining the list becomes the responsibility of the program and not clueless users. That more what you see? I could live with that quiurte easily. But, such a system is more than could be written directly either in Make or using sh ... I mean, you _could_ use sh, but the software would be too complicated to maintain. Could I use some tool? I would not exactly love doing it in C, but I guess I could do that (I'd rather use something like Python, but it's not available in the base, and I think I would want this available at system install time. Please, comment more, I think I like the way you're driving this, so let me see if I have really gotten your idea.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4738BF6E.6050902>