Gonzalo Nemmi wrote: > On Monday 02 February 2009 6:39:25 pm Bill Moran wrote: >> In response to Warren Block <wbl...@wonkity.com>: >>> On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Bill Moran wrote: >>>> How about: >>>> >>>> Options for port-fu >>>> [ ] BRG Bernstein Riggs Guillotine parsing >>>> [X] QFZ Quantum Freeze Zulu rending >>>> >>>> At least that one gives me _some_ idea what those TLAs mean. >>> There was talk some time ago of having extended descriptions. Several >>> ideas, but the one that made the most sense to me would be a box at the >>> bottom that would display a description as you moved through the >>> options: >>> >>> [.] BRG >>> [X] QFZ >>> >>> Bernstein Riggs Guillotine parsing >>> >>> with the . representing the cursor/highlight position. Move down and >>> the bottom line would change to say "Quantum Freeze Zulu rending". The >>> nice thing about the box at the bottom is it would give a full line or >>> possibly several lines for explanations. >>> >>> Seems like it could be added without breaking the existing system with >>> an optional OPTIONS_DESC variable that would correspond with OPTIONS. >>> I don't really know how hard that would be; ideas are cheap, >>> implementation more costly. >> I don't think there's any need for any new features in the ports >> infrastructure. I think it's just a matter of Makefile authors taking >> the time to describe their options. A quick test of some ports turns >> up this one: >> >> [ ] OPENGL OpenGL support >> >> True but useless. How about: >> >> [ ] OPENGL Use OpenGL graphics library >> >> ...which, at least give the user _some_ idea what they're doing. >> >> OpenGL probably isn't a good example, however. It's pretty easy to Google >> OpenGL and figure out what it is. Here's some more bizarre options: >> >> [X] EPUB Epub modules >> [X] EXTENSIONS Extensions >> [X] TEMPLATE Templates >> [X] TOOLS Tools >> >> I mean, if I enable "Extensions", what happens? How do I figure out >> what happens? I have to read the Makefile, at which point having these >> options on a menu is pretty pointless. I mean, I can't even come up >> with a Google search to help me figure out what "tools" are involved >> here. >> >> There are some ports that do this very well. For example: >> [ ] NLS Use internationalized messages >> [ ] PAM Build with PAM support (server only) >> [ ] LDAP Build with LDAP authentication support >> [ ] MIT_KRB5 Build with MIT's kerberos support >> [ ] HEIMDAL_KRB5 Builds with Heimdal kerberos support >> [ ] OPTIMIZED_CFLAGS Builds with compiler optimizations (-O3) >> [X] XML Build with XML data type (server) >> [X] TZDATA Use internal timezone database (server) >> [ ] DEBUG Builds with debugging symbols >> [ ] ICU Use ICU for unicode collation (server) >> [ ] INTDATE Builds with 64-bit date/time type (server) >> >> I mean, a Google on ICU is liable to bring up all sorts of medical drama >> websites, but I can do a search for "ICU unicode" and find my answer on >> the first result. Not only am I told that optimized compiler flags are >> an option, but I'm told the exact one that will be used (-O3) >> >> The porters handbook doesn't seem to offer any helpful advice on these: >> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-options.html >> >> In fact, the examples it provides are excellent examples of doing it >> WRONG. >> >> Let me see about making a patch to the porters handbook to provide some >> advice ... > > +1,000,000 on your idea. > > Yes .. you are absolutely right ... even if you know your way around make && > gcc && compiling software .. and even if you _really_ know your way around > make && gcc && compiling software, there's no chance on earth that anyone can > tell what does every single option on every single Makefile actually mean. > > As you pointed out: > > [ ] BRG > [X] QFZ > > means _nothing_ to 99.9% of the users... Be Really Grumpy? Buy Red Goggles? > Quite Faster Zapping?? Quit Filtering Zealots?? > > This kind of things really hurts the "good documentation" reputation that > FreeBSD has rightfully earned. > > And I do agree with you: > > " I don't think there's any need for any new features in the ports > infrastructure. I think it's just a matter of Makefile authors taking the > time to describe their options. " > > And once again .. this is the way to go for me too: > >> There are some ports that do this very well. For example: >> [ ] NLS Use internationalized messages >> [ ] PAM Build with PAM support (server only) >> [ ] LDAP Build with LDAP authentication support >> [ ] MIT_KRB5 Build with MIT's kerberos support >> [ ] HEIMDAL_KRB5 Builds with Heimdal kerberos support >> [ ] OPTIMIZED_CFLAGS Builds with compiler optimizations (-O3) >> [X] XML Build with XML data type (server) >> [X] TZDATA Use internal timezone database (server) >> [ ] DEBUG Builds with debugging symbols >> [ ] ICU Use ICU for unicode collation (server) >> [ ] INTDATE Builds with 64-bit date/time type (server) > > no need to break anything ... just _be_verbose_ > > Regards If you could give me a list of ports which do this I would glad to work on patches to send to the relevant maintainers.
-- Eitan Adler "Security is increased by designing for the way humans actually behave." -Jakob Nielsen _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
