Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 10:16:37 -0500 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> To: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.bawue.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, David Southwell <david@vizion2000.net> Subject: Re: ./options-descr file suggestion for ports Message-ID: <20070611151636.GA16517@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <20070609203316.GC71246@voodoo.bawue.com> References: <200706090936.51775.david@vizion2000.net> <20070609203316.GC71246@voodoo.bawue.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 10:33:17PM +0200, Kirill Ponomarew wrote: > On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 09:36:51AM -0700, David Southwell wrote: > > Hi > >=20 > > Would it be possible , when a port has options, to ask porters if they= would=20 > > consider the merits/demerits of adding: > >=20 > > 1. An ./options-descr file in the port directory that describes the op= tions,=20 > > their purpose and any notes about an option > >=20 > > Reasons: > > This would be extremely useful for anyone not familiar with the port to= help=20 > > in the task of choosing which options to install.=20 > >=20 > > I realise that this would depend upon whether maintainers are willing t= o add=20 > > an additional task to the already heavy burden they undertake. Maintain= ers=20 > > who are willing to consider this idea but are reluctant to prepare the = notes=20 > > themselves but do not have the time or are for any reason reluctant to = do so,=20 > > could invite users to submit notes for incorporating in ./options-descr. > >=20 > > By way of example I am just installing www/ruby-gem-rails and had no im= mediate=20 > > idea whether or not to add fastcgi support without trying to find out w= hether=20 > > it is or is not needed when one has mod_ruby installed and > > LoadModule ruby_module libexec/apache/mod_ruby.so > > in httpd.conf. A brief note in a ./options-descr could be very helpful,= =20 > > especially for some ports where the options are sometimes numerous and = not=20 > > always completely documented. > >=20 > > A little bit of intial guidance about options would be most helpful to = a=20 > > system administrator who is not necessarily familiar with the a specifi= c=20 > > port. >=20 > That's what ports/KNOBS supposed to be, see rev. 1.1 by ahze: >=20 > Limitations to KNOBS: In the future we plan to add support for > OPTIONS to support the KNOBS file, and so dialog(1) will be able to > handle the size of each knob knob-name's are limited to 12 > characters and knob-descriptions are limited to 45 characters, not > including the white space between the knob-name and > knob-description. >=20 > Though, I don't know when OPTIONS support to KNOBS will be added. While I think KNOBS has merit, I don't think it addresses per-port issues such as documenting dependencies between various OPTIONS or documenting that a particular option has a large or small impact on dependencies. -- Brooks --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFGbWdUXY6L6fI4GtQRAhD7AJwLoIVdufnw75Ej68cJvZQOLk+DtQCgjsJN iUrpRsIo9H8usowdimFAjaw= =gdUs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070611151636.GA16517>