From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 20 00:11:37 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C17441065680; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 00:11:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 172-17-198-245.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08F03157A23; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 00:11:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4EEFD2B8.1050006@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 16:11:36 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111110 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Rees References: <201112181751.pBIHpivv027591@repoman.freebsd.org> <4EEF0AF1.20501@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: undefined OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-xfce@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/sysutils/xfce4-utils Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 00:11:37 -0000 On 12/19/2011 02:03, Chris Rees wrote: > > On 19 Dec 2011 09:59, "Doug Barton" > wrote: >> >> Thanks, that's 1/3 of the job done. :) The problem is that the current >> OPTION creates the false idea that the only way you can lock your screen >> is to use xlockmore. >> >> Perhaps you missed my followup where I mentioned that the next step >> would be to add an OPTION for xscreensaver as well, and the logic to >> avoid having them both defined. > > I'll look at that later. Thanks. In answer to your question avoiding having both enabled would be nice since it avoids duplicate, unnecessary redundancy. >> Better yet would be to detect if one or the other is already installed, >> and default the OPTIONS accordingly. > > Autodetection in ports? No thanks! I didn't suggest autodetecting for the dependencies, I suggested it for the OPTIONS. That's been done for a long time, and ideally should be how it's always done. Doug -- [^L] Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/