why vim ports have personal KNOBS for options
demelier.david at gmail.com
Mon Mar 28 08:48:16 UTC 2011
On 27/03/2011 21:40, Subbsd wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Erik Trulsson<ertr1013 at student.uu.se> wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:19:44PM +0400, Subbsd wrote:
>>> Ive wanted to ask why the option of vim port has not yet been handed
>>> via dialog by default. Personally, to make them work, we must define
>>> WITH_OPTIONS=yes in make.conf (or WITH_VIM_OPTIONS=yes). Life without
>>> it is so difficult ;)
>> Because the maintainer of the vim port has a dislike for the OPTIONS
> I expected to hear that just so happened historically. Тext question I
> ask only to satisfy my interest. What OPTIONS framework basically can
> someone not like it?
> Цhat are the disadvantages compared to " grep define
> /usr/ports/<category>/<portname>/Makefile "? Maybe the other of
> thousand maintainrs something not know about it?
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
bapt@ made a proposal to improve the OPTION framework and it will be
reviewed by portmgr@ soon.
This will include a improvment that obrien@ disliked much : when you
have WITHOUT_NLS=true in your /etc/make.conf any port that use OPTIONS
framework will not honour this knob and this is obviously painful.
The bapt@ patch correct this, so the the new OPTION framework will read
these KNOBS (but of course there is more coming)
More information about the freebsd-questions