interactive ports - the plague

[RW]

On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:27:31 -0500
Naram Qashat <cyberbotx at cyberbotx.com> wrote:

> RW wrote:
> > On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 10:24:21 +0100
> > Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze at bsdforen.de> wrote:
> > 
> >> I don't mind ports that use the config framework. You can deal with
> >> them without trouble by setting BATCH, using portmaster or
> >> portconfig-recursive from bsdadminscripts.
> >>
> >> But I find ports like ghostscript-gpl that open an ncurses dialogue
> >> between configure and build stage very annoying. 
> > 
> > Setting BATCH is supposed to prevent genuinely interactive ports
> > from building (that's actually the original purpose of BATCH).

> I believe a good example of what he might be talking about is the jdk
> ports. Because of the licensing of those ports, they will bring up an
> EULA that you need to read and then type "yes" afterwards.  Even with
> BATCH set, it still stops at that EULA.

IIRC these ports refuse to fetch the distfiles, and ask you to
fetch them manually from the websites, where you have to agree to the
terms, they aren't actually interactive.