Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 21 Feb 2005 20:14:29 +0100
From:      Florent Thoumie <flz@xbsd.org>
To:        Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.oberon.net>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: devel/pcre and WITH_UTF8
Message-ID:  <421A3315.2070607@xbsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050221181645.GH9175@voodoo.oberon.net>
References:  <20050221142951.GA48781@pc5-179.lri.fr> <20050221153615.GE9175@voodoo.oberon.net> <20050221155832.GJ51280@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de> <200502211744.52024.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <20050221181645.GH9175@voodoo.oberon.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig71492848F2F281581AB47DC2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Kirill Ponomarew wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 05:44:47PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
>
>>>Yes, you're right, since there are exponentially many combinations of
>>>options, creating slave ports is not the right way.
>>>We probably need a mechanism [...]
>>
>>Don't overengineer. Slave ports pretty much *are* the right way to deal with
>>this sort of situation - which is that *some* option is too controverse to be
>>either default off or default on. This does not at all imply that you need to
>>translate *every* option there is (or could be imagined) into a slave port.
>
>
> It depends on what you want to do.  I could split net/gnunet into:
> gnunet-gdbm, gnunet-mysql, gnunet-tdb, gnunet-bdb3, gnunet-sqlite,
> gnunet-ipv6, gnunet-guile, hence we get 7 slave ports and one master
> port.  I bet there are people who would think it would be useful to
> split it into parts, but since all these years I still object to do
> it.
>
> Well, finding another stylish solution instead of slave ports, would
> be very desirable.

	I guess it could be easy to patch OPTIONS to support this.

	We could add a @comment line in the packing list, telling which
	support has been enabled at compile time. That would be easy, but
	only OPTIONS'ized ports could benefit of such a patch (and ports
	that manually add this @comment line).

--
Florent Thoumie
flz@xbsd.org

--------------enig71492848F2F281581AB47DC2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCGjMaMxEkbVFH3PQRAlN8AJ0Qh+FnxnL+gfO+jo9KeFXPSRSkvwCfaUom
TxClGD6+lBueEaY1QeCw/k0=
=4fHm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig71492848F2F281581AB47DC2--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?421A3315.2070607>