HAVE_GNOME vs. bsd.ports.options.mk

Eitan Adler lists at eitanadler.com
Wed Oct 10 15:59:34 UTC 2012

On 10 October 2012 06:49, Michael Gmelin <freebsd at grem.de> wrote:
... > I had that turned on by default to make sure
> the port behaves exactly like it did before conversion to OptionsNG
> (it's not my lawn, you know).

Hehe, this is good thing. Normally you want to try to replicate
existing behavior.

> The committer changed that to be off by
> default, since this is a better solution for package building and I
> agree with him.

But... in this case the previous behavior was "buggy" so it had to be changed.

> Also note that there are a lot of ports that use either techniques for
> auto detection (e.g. checking for the existence of libraries to bring
> in functionality) and that those should be covered as well - simply not
> allowing auto detection will massively reduce functionality, so using
> an OPTION to allow it might be the way to go. I think AUTODETECT might

I agree.

P.S. I never did properly thank you for all those OptionsNG PRs. Most
of them went in without any changes at all, which is unusual. Thanks!

Eitan Adler

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list