Andrew W. Nosenko andrew.w.nosenko at gmail.com
Wed Oct 6 09:33:35 UTC 2010

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:40, David O'Brien <obrien at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:34:52AM -0700, David O'Brien (@FreeBSD) wrote:
>> > 2010/10/3 Matthew Seaman <m.seaman at infracaninophile.co.uk>:
>> > > In fact, you might just as well write a small HTML form, display it
>> > > using lynx or w3c or some other text mode browser[*], and then have the
>> > > form action feed into a CGI program that outputs a small Makefile with
>> > > appropriate variable definitions in it.
>> I like this statement -- as it shows just how complex this will get when
>> taken to its natural conclusion.
> This is also how ridiculous things can get:
> curl 7.21.1 now offers me:
>    [X] WERROR       Treat compilation warnings as errors
>    Can the port maintainer really not decide if that should just be
>    turned off or turned on for FreeBSD?!?

I wonder why -Werror even ever considered to be turned  "on" at all.

>    Do *I* really need to think about this one?
>    But of course it doesn't offer me turning on NOPORTDOCS or
>    NOPORTEXAMPLES, which would be useful.
>    [I don't think any ports do...]
> cscope 15.7a offers me:
>    [ ] XCSCOPE  Install (X)Emacs package
>    Do we really need to be bothered with OPTIONS to avoid installing an
>    87K .el file?!?

Yes.  I'm, as everyday cscope and emacs user, would be very frustrated
if xcscope.el would be installed by ports overriding my patched
version and forcing me to patch it again and again.

Why xcscope.el didn't splinted out into separate port/package -- it's
another question...

Andrew W. Nosenko <andrew.w.nosenko at gmail.com>

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list