Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:30:42 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: Paul Schmehl <pauls@utdallas.edu> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Limitations of Ports System Message-ID: <4762E7F2.6040207@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <B3A6C3A7E2071BE94F2EFA1E@utd59514.utdallas.edu> References: <475F7390.9090509@gmail.com> <0F330142-A3CA-4E6E-84BD-FDE55A8E3AEE@yahoo.com> <20071213111050.O6078@wonkity.com> <200712140312.47837.danny@ricin.com> <4761F9E2.7090706@gmail.com> <20071214121906.1241dcdd@gumby.homeunix.com.> <B3A6C3A7E2071BE94F2EFA1E@utd59514.utdallas.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Paul Schmehl wrote: > --On Friday, December 14, 2007 12:19:06 +0000 RW > <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 22:34:58 -0500 "Aryeh M. Friedman" >> <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Namely if I build abc with options 123 and 345 and def with 345 >>> and 678 then 345 will be cached for def since we already set it >>> for abc. >> >> How do you know the user wants 345 set on both ports? >> >> It might be a useful stable feature on "abc", but causes lock-ups >> on "def" > > SInce I've already killfiled Aryeh, I can only infer what you are > responding to and respond to him. But let me state this > emphatically in the hopes it will get through his thick skull. IT > IS NOT THE JOB OF PORTS TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR USERS. Please repeat > that one hundred times until it gets through. > > No port should *ever* make decisions on a users behalf. > Suggestions, yes (e.g. OPTIONS that are enabled by default.) > Decisions, no. If you depend on another port *and* on certain > knobs in that dependency being enabled, then *tell* the user that > during your port's install and let them decide how to handle it. > DO NOT enable those knobs yourself, no matter how tempting it may > be. > > It is beyond impossible for anyone to know what every user who is > installing ports already has on their boxes or what they might want > to add or ***what you might break***. Once you begin making > decisions for them, you could well stomp all over something that > was functioning perfectly normally and break a critical box. > > DON'T DO IT. That is so Microsoftian it's not funny. > I refuse to debate people with ear plugs on... if you want an honest debate please do so honestly -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHYufyzIOMjAek4JIRAjWuAKCjBekW4+ysIJEBHZ5HShiIbzrRkwCcDo5H WVBI+0rgJDXcTG3Wpeu+90Y= =rsQy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4762E7F2.6040207>