devel/pcre and WITH_UTF8

[Michael Nottebrock]

On Monday, 21. February 2005 19:16, Kirill Ponomarew wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 05:44:47PM +0100, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> > > Yes, you're right, since there are exponentially many combinations of
> > > options, creating slave ports is not the right way.
> > > We probably need a mechanism [...]
> >
> > Don't overengineer. Slave ports pretty much *are* the right way to deal
> > with this sort of situation - which is that *some* option is too
> > controverse to be either default off or default on. This does not at all
> > imply that you need to translate *every* option there is (or could be
> > imagined) into a slave port.
>
> It depends on what you want to do. 

Right. Creating slave ports is something you do out of necessity, not because 
you can.

> I could split net/gnunet into: 
> gnunet-gdbm, gnunet-mysql, gnunet-tdb, gnunet-bdb3, gnunet-sqlite,
> gnunet-ipv6, gnunet-guile, hence we get 7 slave ports and one master
> port.

That would certainly be better than the current status quo, which makes the 
gnunet package rather bare-bones - at least you should convert it to OPTIONS 
and default them to on. However, you wouldn't need to bother with a 
gnunet-ipv6 port - even the option is rather gratuitous.

-- 
   ,_,   | Michael Nottebrock               | lofi at freebsd.org
 (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve     | http://www.freebsd.org
   \u/   | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20050221/e9579b9e/attachment.bin