Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 4 Feb 2009 07:20:31 -0500
From:      Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Cc:        Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>, ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: A plea or sanity in port options menu
Message-ID:  <20090204122031.GQ4134@atarininja.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090202153925.5f4ae6d3.wmoran@potentialtech.com>
References:  <20090202141835.b44d09be.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902021302230.37428@wonkity.com> <20090202153925.5f4ae6d3.wmoran@potentialtech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 03:39:25PM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>:
> 
> > On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Bill Moran wrote:
> > 
> > > How about:
> > >
> > >       Options for port-fu
> > > [ ] BRG   Bernstein Riggs Guillotine parsing
> > > [X] QFZ   Quantum Freeze Zulu rending
> > >
> > > At least that one gives me _some_ idea what those TLAs mean.
> > 
> > There was talk some time ago of having extended descriptions.  Several 
> > ideas, but the one that made the most sense to me would be a box at the 
> > bottom that would display a description as you moved through the 
> > options:
> > 
> > [.] BRG
> > [X] QFZ
> > 
> > Bernstein Riggs Guillotine parsing
> > 
> > with the . representing the cursor/highlight position.  Move down and 
> > the bottom line would change to say "Quantum Freeze Zulu rending".  The 
> > nice thing about the box at the bottom is it would give a full line or 
> > possibly several lines for explanations.
> > 
> > Seems like it could be added without breaking the existing system with 
> > an optional OPTIONS_DESC variable that would correspond with OPTIONS.
> > I don't really know how hard that would be; ideas are cheap, 
> > implementation more costly.
> 
> I don't think there's any need for any new features in the ports
> infrastructure.  I think it's just a matter of Makefile authors taking
> the time to describe their options.  A quick test of some ports turns
> up this one:
> 
>  [ ] OPENGL  OpenGL support 
> 
> True but useless.  How about:
> 
>  [ ] OPENGL  Use OpenGL graphics library
> 
> ...which, at least give the user _some_ idea what they're doing.
> 
> OpenGL probably isn't a good example, however.  It's pretty easy to Google
> OpenGL and figure out what it is.  Here's some more bizarre options:
> 
>  [X] EPUB          Epub modules
>  [X] EXTENSIONS    Extensions
>  [X] TEMPLATE      Templates
>  [X] TOOLS         Tools
> 
> I mean, if I enable "Extensions", what happens?  How do I figure out
> what happens?  I have to read the Makefile, at which point having these
> options on a menu is pretty pointless.  I mean, I can't even come up
> with a Google search to help me figure out what "tools" are involved
> here.
> 
> There are some ports that do this very well.  For example:
>  [ ] NLS               Use internationalized messages
>  [ ] PAM               Build with PAM support (server only)
>  [ ] LDAP              Build with LDAP authentication support
>  [ ] MIT_KRB5          Build with MIT's kerberos support
>  [ ] HEIMDAL_KRB5      Builds with Heimdal kerberos support
>  [ ] OPTIMIZED_CFLAGS  Builds with compiler optimizations (-O3)
>  [X] XML               Build with XML data type (server)
>  [X] TZDATA            Use internal timezone database (server)
>  [ ] DEBUG             Builds with debugging symbols
>  [ ] ICU               Use ICU for unicode collation (server)
>  [ ] INTDATE           Builds with 64-bit date/time type (server)
> 
> I mean, a Google on ICU is liable to bring up all sorts of medical drama
> websites, but I can do a search for "ICU unicode" and find my answer on
> the first result.  Not only am I told that optimized compiler flags are
> an option, but I'm told the exact one that will be used (-O3)
> 
> The porters handbook doesn't seem to offer any helpful advice on these:
> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-options.html
> 
> In fact, the examples it provides are excellent examples of doing it
> WRONG.
> 
> Let me see about making a patch to the porters handbook to provide some
> advice ...

While I'm not opposed to being verbose in the short descriptions there
is a limit to the length of the message.  If you want more accurate
descriptions I have done the work to make it happen (ports/123185), and
it is now sitting in portmgr territory.

It's a modification to bsd.port.mk but it is the best way to truly solve
the problem since there is a length limitation to the short field.

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/123185

-- WXS



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090204122031.GQ4134>