svn commit: r305288 - head/Mk

[Jan Beich]

Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at FreeBSD.org> writes:

> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 12:51:07PM -1000, Jan Beich wrote:
>
>> Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at FreeBSD.org> writes:
>> 
>> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:59:46PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:12:50AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:56:21AM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>> >> > > That's because OptionsNG poorly implement mutually exclusive
>> >> > > options.  I
>> >> > > hope that eventually dialog's --radiolist would be utilized
>> >> > > for proper
>> >> > > handling, and sane knobs names would be restored.
>> >> > > 
>> >> > > Sounds like a nice port junior hacker project.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Not hat junior dialog(1) can't mix radiolist and classic
>> >> > checklist that is
>> >> > why it doesn't use it, using libdialog(3), it would be easiy to
>> >> > implement,
>> >> > but that won't be usable for a while (until all supported version of
>> >> > freebsd has it.
>> >> 
>> >> Ah, OK, that explains it (lack of radiobuttons now).  Is it known what's
>> >> preventing all supported versions to have working libdialog(3),
>> >> if we have
>> >> working dialog(1) already?
>> >> 
>> >> ./danfe
>> >
>> > new dialog is only on 9.x and 10.x, if will require to code some special
>> > dialog(1) dedicated for ports, MFCing libdialog to 8 and 7 is complicated
>> > because the API isn't compatible.
>> 
>> Why not add devel/cdialog to bootstrap on < 9.0 and install it only when
>> BATCH is not set?
>> 
>
> That do not change the fact that ${SOMEONE} will have to code a dialog(1)
> dedicated for ports, the library is able to let us mix radio and
> check, but the
> frontend (dialog(1)) is still not able to.
>
> if someone stepup to do it, I'll be more than happy :)

Did you miss one?

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2010-November/064363.html
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2010-December/064772.html

>
> regards,
> Bapt