Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 08:49:42 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> To: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> Cc: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG>, anders@fix.no, andreas@FreeBSD.ORG, eric@cybernut.com, ijliao@FreeBSD.ORG, jdp@FreeBSD.ORG, jdp@polstra.com, jmz@FreeBSD.ORG, jseger@FreeBSD.ORG, keith@FreeBSD.ORG, knu@FreeBSD.ORG, lioux@FreeBSD.ORG, matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org, mi@aldan.algebra.com, nectar@FreeBSD.ORG, nobutaka@nobutaka.com, obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, ozz@FreeBSD.org.ru, sam@inf.enst.fr, shige@FreeBSD.ORG, trevor@FreeBSD.ORG, yatt@msc.biglobe.ne.jp, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: WITHOUT_X vs. WITHOUT_X11 vs. NO_X Message-ID: <7782.991637382@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 01 Jun 2001 14:53:35 EST." <15127.62143.888966.869172@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 14:53:35 EST, Mike Meyer wrote: > > I'm voting for WITHOUT_X11 - it is unlikely that we will see X12 in a > > foreseable future, so why to bother? > > If we never see X12, there's no reason to use either one. On the off > chance that we do, we'll have problems. Why ask for trouble? Guys, whether we use WITHOUT_X11 or WITHOUT_X, changes will have to be made. Since WITHOUT_X makes a little bit more sense than WITHOUT_X11, let's just make the changes and be done with it. There are bigger fish to fry. :-) Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7782.991637382>