port variants

[Ion-Mihai Tetcu]

On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 05:00:34 -0700
perryh at pluto.rain.com wrote:

> Kevin Oberman <kob6558 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > While I think makefile-options is the way to go, I should also
> > point out that for the specific case of emacs and X11, it is
> > not used due to the very large differences. Other "variants"
> > are handled via options, but there are separate emacs and
> > emacs-nox11 ports.
> > ...
> > The port maintainer/developer has to make a call as to which
> > approach is more practical, but I suspect portmgr@ will press
> > for maximum use of makefile-options.

Unfortunately we can't force anyone to use OPTIONS. Yet.
I hope things will change once we get OPTIONS-NG in, since the new
framework will address (AFAIK) all the objections people have against
our current OPTIONS.

> One reason to use a slave port instead of an option is so that both
> configurations will be routinely build-tested, and corresponding
> packages made available.  Any one port can have only one "default"
> configuration.

Yes. We're lagging behind in this area.
With the new OPTIONS and the next iteration of pkgNG, this will be
hopefully solved. BUt it will take at least a year.


-- 
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
  "Intellectual Property" is   nowhere near as valuable   as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> itetcu at FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20120415/18c0fc14/signature.pgp