Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 00:25:58 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/gettext Makefile Message-ID: <20040712072558.GA38505@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040712063346.GA36974@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200407120516.i6C5GThX001618@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040712054253.GB33305@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040712062800.GA37188@dragon.nuxi.com> <20040712063346.GA36974@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 11:33:46PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 11:28:00PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 10:42:53PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 05:16:29AM +0000, David E. O'Brien wrote: > > > > obrien 2004-07-12 05:16:29 UTC > > > > > > > > FreeBSD ports repository > > > > > > > > Modified files: > > > > devel/gettext Makefile > > > > Log: > > > > Fix the release build. > > > > > > What's the problem? This surely isn't the best way to fix it. > > > > Some ports needed in a 'make release' have dependencies on gettext. > > > > If either of the nobs had any real functionality, *maybe* the overly > > interactive dialog would be worth it. But this port was hassling users > > over useless bits. To tell the truth, I don't think "WITH_HTMLMAN" > > actually does anything. > > > > If this were the 'mutt-devel' port, I could understand the use of > > "OPTIONS". But if someone is really missing these bits, a gettext-<BITS> > > port should be created. > > The interactive OPTIONS setting is easily disabled by setting BATCH Interactive OPTIONS are heavy weight in the usability department -- the Ports committers needs to take a serious look at what warrants OPTIONS use. Otherwise the Ports Collection will become a tangled mess and less and less usable. For one example, needing the root password twice just to *BUILD* a port is unacceptable. > (which is the canonical way to disable all kinds of port > interactivity). You should just add that to the release port build > environment instead. Are you really saying HTML man pages justifies the use of OPTIONS compared to how other ports handles much more important options? -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040712072558.GA38505>