[HEADSUP] Please convert your ports to new options framework

[Chris Rees]

On Jun 8, 2012 2:32 PM, "Naram Qashat" <cyberbotx at cyberbotx.com> wrote:
>
> On 06/03/12 14:44, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The new options framework is now in the port for a week, most of the
problems
>> directly concerning the framework seems to have been addressed.
>>
>> Some issue seems still to be there regarding backward compatibility but I
>> haven't been able to reproduced any of the one that are supposed to be
left.
>>
>> The porters handbook has been updated and the new option framework is
well
>> documented (thank you crees)
>>
>> Please convert as soon as possible your ports to the new framework. As
you may
>> already have notice bsd.options.desc.mk provide shared descriptions of
the usual
>> options, try to be consistent and reuse the same options name so that it
is
>> simpler for users, please override the description for your ports each
time it
>> make sense, remember that most of the time a functional description is
more
>> accurate than a technical one, users might not know the technical
details but
>> they know what functionnality they do want.
>>
>> All the complaints I found in the past concerning the old framework have
been
>> addressed in the new one, you can have mutually exclusive options,
checked by
>> the framework, you can have group options, you can have 0 or only 1
option among
>> N or 0 or N options among M. be creative, most of the use case should be
doable.
>>
>> for 3 special options: DOCS, EXAMPLES and NLS, you do not need to
activate them
>> in OPTIONS_DEFAULT as the framework already activate them. you also do
not need
>> to add them to OPTIONS_DEFINE if you only use one of them, do avoid
having the
>> dialog UI to show up.
>>
>> DOCS in long term maybe used to replace NOPORTDOCS (NOPORTDOCS is
defined has a
>> backward compatibility if as a user you remove it).
>>
>> Same goes for EXAMPLES ->  NOPORTEXAMPLES
>> and NLS ->  WITHOUT_NLS
>>
>> In my concern the priority is:
>>
>> 1/ convert all the old OPTIONS:
>> Here is a list of them
>> http://wiki.freebsd.org/Ports/Options/ConvertingToOptionsNG
>>
>> 2/ replace all the knobs by optionsNg options (replacing the KNOBS file
by
>> bsd.options.desc
>>
>> regards,
>> Bapt
>
>
> So I have a question from a consumer standpoint as opposed to a
maintainer standpoint.  If we use portconf to store all of our WITH_*
options for ports, will that continue to work with ports that have switched
to optionsng or is there something I need to change in my ports.conf file
for the options to continue to be recognized?
>

I'll make you a nice script for that purpose later.

Chris