Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 04:53:00 -0500 From: Stan Gammons <s_gammons@charter.net> To: "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Port Build options Message-ID: <1375264380.27294.9.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <CAOFF%2BZ13DfXR8=rqBmAO9SNbw2zjXGeBrid-moCKTHrMDbyEJQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <1375237644.27294.4.camel@localhost> <CAOFF%2BZ13DfXR8=rqBmAO9SNbw2zjXGeBrid-moCKTHrMDbyEJQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 04:53 -0400, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: > Stan, > > This is a interesting question and one that I struggled with back when I > first came to open source YEARS ago... > what time and experience will taught me is that, more is almost ALWAYS, NOT > better... so really there is no upside at all to building all of the ports > with all of the options... even if it COULD be done... > > on FreeBSD, I can tell you that the packages are build with the default > options... that is to say... when you type "make install" if the port has > options, whatever is "checked" when the screen comes up, is what the > package would have... Thanks everyone for the replies on this. The reason I ask is I continue to struggle to get KDE4 to work the way I want. Or perhaps I should say the way it works on Linux. I've used FreeBSD for several years, but this is the first time I'd tried to make a graphical interface work with it. Perhaps that's a question/problem for another list and best not posted here. Stan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1375264380.27294.9.camel>