Ports with GUI configs

RW fbsd06 at mlists.homeunix.com
Fri Nov 16 06:50:24 PST 2007

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:58:35 -0500
Chuck Robey <chuckr at chuckr.org> wrote:

ed to take exception to that.  My claim (and I have the messages
> in which I made it) is that the setting of options needed these
> changes:
> (1) To move the time that they need to be set, from ports compile
> time to  system install time, and
> ...
> I think (I may be wrong, correct me if I am) that you were taking 
> exception, above, to my first point, right?  You may correct me on
> that, but on whether or not it will actually succeed in this is what
> all this discussion is about.  I did not bring this up without
> bringing the idea past local friends, and defending it there, so I
> think I can do that. Do i need to requote all of my arguments about
> that here 

Of course I've read them. They are about dependencies, but port
options are also about the internals of ports. 

Even if all dependency management were take out of port options, it
wouldn't have  a significant impact on the number of ports that use
port options.

>                             ... they will 100% move the work from
> ports build-time to system install-time.  This is pretty simple to
> prove, so I can't follow your assertion, 

If it is pretty simple to prove, you wont mind telling me how your
system could determine at system install time, whether I will want
squid built with AUFS support - even if I don't know much about squid
it the time.

It's a simple question.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list