Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 10:12:36 +0200 From: Gary Jennejohn <garyj@jennejohn.org> To: Sideris Michael <msid@daemons.gr> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports structure and improvement suggestions Message-ID: <200605090812.k498CaSt001467@peedub.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Sideris Michael <msid@daemons.gr> of "Tue, 09 May 2006 00:30:35 %2B0300." <20060508213035.GA73976@daemons.gr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sideris Michael writes: > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 11:20:59PM +0200, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > > > > Sideris Michael writes: > > > > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:47:51PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > > > No one is taking away any rights. > > > > > > Of course. That's why every ports should have a configuration panel. > > > > > > > Wrong. I do not intend to convert any of my ports to use OPTIONS so > > don't bother sending me patches. Many ports are so simple that adding > > a configuration panel would be totally unnnecessary and ridiculous. > > So, if you have 10 of this ports as dependencies, you prefer go seperately > to each port directory and search through the Makefile to find what KNOBS > it provides. Nice. > No, but none of my ports are dependencies, and that is true for the vast majority of ports. You wrote "every ports". I was merely pointing out that not every port needs a configuration panel. --- Gary Jennejohn / garyjATjennejohnDOTorg gjATfreebsdDOTorg garyjATdenxDOTde
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200605090812.k498CaSt001467>