From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 14 14:24:04 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED6BC16A4CE for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:24:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from blacksheep.csh.rit.edu (blacksheep.csh.rit.edu [129.21.60.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D89343D5C for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:24:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from wxs@csh.rit.edu) Received: from fury.csh.rit.edu (fury.csh.rit.edu [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:135:a00:20ff:fe8d:5399]) by blacksheep.csh.rit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4DA19144 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:24:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by fury.csh.rit.edu (Postfix, from userid 44963) id 5C70B14C1; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:24:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:24:00 -0400 From: Wesley Shields To: FreeBSD Ports Message-ID: <20041014142359.GC26752@csh.rit.edu> References: <416C0DE8.3000004@struchtrup.com> <416C35A5.4040703@vonostingroup.com> <20041013123840.GB1301@FreeBSD.org> <20041013193432.GA53895@hub.freebsd.org> <416DAB52.5070404@struchtrup.com> <416DAD75.7000504@vonostingroup.com> <416DB213.3020708@struchtrup.com> <20041014095355.GA61134@elendil.ru> <20041014135041.GB4625@iib.unsam.edu.ar> <416E891E.8070003@vonostingroup.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <416E891E.8070003@vonostingroup.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Subject: Re: alternative options for ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:24:05 -0000 On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 10:11:42AM -0400, Frank Laszlo wrote: > I just had a thought about this whole thing. I know a lot of users feel > intimidated by the Makefile's in ports, > and would not dare open one up in an editor. Even if they did, they > wouldnt understand it fully. so what if > the ports had a target that listed possible options within the Makefile, > and what exactly they did. Maybe > this would require another file in the ports, like 'pkg-options' It > would be formated something like this > > WITH_SOMEFEATURE Add so and so feature to the package. > WITH_SOMETHINGELSE This will create something here. > > That way a user could just type something like 'make listoptions' and it > will give a nice list of build options > for a specific port. Anyone have any feedback on this? > > Regards, > Frank Some ports already list their tunable option(s). Check out net/gaim as an example. I do think that adding a listoptions target might be helpful to those that are scared of opening up a Makefile and doing a little learning. -- WXS