From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 29 23:38:48 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974E016A400 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 23:38:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danny@ricin.com) Received: from smtpq1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl (smtpq1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl [213.51.146.200]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C6E043D53 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 23:38:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from danny@ricin.com) Received: from [213.51.146.189] (port=39527 helo=smtp2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl) by smtpq1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1FOkFQ-0002Lw-CO; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 01:38:44 +0200 Received: from cp464173-a.dbsch1.nb.home.nl ([84.27.215.228]:59429 helo=desktop.homenet) by smtp2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1FOkFP-0002ax-43; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 01:38:43 +0200 From: Danny Pansters To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 01:38:39 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <200603292344.52149.danny@ricin.com> <200603292353.15786.danny@ricin.com> <442B1057.5000904@vonostingroup.com> In-Reply-To: <442B1057.5000904@vonostingroup.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603300138.39790.danny@ricin.com> X-AtHome-MailScanner-Information: Please contact support@home.nl for more information X-AtHome-MailScanner: Found to be clean Cc: Frank Laszlo Subject: Re: mutually exclusive OPTIONS? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 23:38:48 -0000 On Thursday 30 March 2006 00:55, you wrote: > Danny Pansters wrote: > > On Wednesday 29 March 2006 23:49, Freddie Cash wrote: > >> On Wed, March 29, 2006 1:44 pm, Danny Pansters wrote: > >>> I'm making a port that has several mutually exclusive compile-time > >>> options. I want to present them as OPTIONS as should, but is there a > >>> way within the ports framework to ensure that only one (of the 5 > >>> possibilities) is selected, or when one of them is the default but > >>> then with 4 mutually exclusive OPTIONS if the user needs one of teh > >>> non-default options? > > See ports/95085[1]. Thanks > > Cheers, > Frank > > [1]http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/95085 Nice. That's pretty much what I asked for, radio/combo box behaviour, I knew it was in dialog but not in ports. However, I also have two other options that are of the A or B flavor. The way it's done now, these don't really mix, right? Perhaps some more dialog lingo could go in port OPTIONS, especially since it's increasingly becoming (rightfully so) the de facto way to present build/install choices. I'm not very familiar with dialog but I'm afraid that the functionality I would like to see would unavoidably require submenus (translated to suboptions) much like sysinstall does. Are more people interested in having some more dialog-foo incorperated into port OPTIONS? (I'm willing to chip in or at least test) Thanks, Dan