From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 8 21:30:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org 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 ACFAB16A400 for ; Mon, 8 May 2006 21:30:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from msid@daemons.gr) Received: from jefferson.hostingzoom.com (jefferson.hostingzoom.com [216.118.117.94]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BAE343D6A for ; Mon, 8 May 2006 21:30:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from msid@daemons.gr) Received: from [88.218.36.6] (port=63200 helo=localhost) by jefferson.hostingzoom.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.52) id 1FdDJP-0002ZY-Fw; Mon, 08 May 2006 16:30:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 00:30:35 +0300 From: Sideris Michael To: Gary Jennejohn Message-ID: <20060508213035.GA73976@daemons.gr> References: <20060508205703.GA11215@daemons.gr> <200605082120.k48LKxSi006193@peedub.jennejohn.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200605082120.k48LKxSi006193@peedub.jennejohn.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - jefferson.hostingzoom.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - daemons.gr X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports structure and improvement suggestions X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 21:30:43 -0000 On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 11:20:59PM +0200, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > > Sideris Michael writes: > > > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:47:51PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > > No one is taking away any rights. > > > > Of course. That's why every ports should have a configuration panel. > > > > Wrong. I do not intend to convert any of my ports to use OPTIONS so > don't bother sending me patches. Many ports are so simple that adding > a configuration panel would be totally unnnecessary and ridiculous. So, if you have 10 of this ports as dependencies, you prefer go seperately to each port directory and search through the Makefile to find what KNOBS it provides. Nice.