On Tue, 19 Mar 2013, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 01:59:04PM -0600, Warren Block wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
Hi all,
Since the work on the new options framework has been started more than 2 years
ago, we faced a problem with the make config interface.
dialog(1) is too limited to be able to represent in a simple UI all the features
proposed by the new framework.
The idea of writing a new UI was born at that time, eadler step in and wrote a
first attempt called dialog4ports using ncurses, but never get into completion.
A few month ago Ilya A. Arkhipov decided to jump in that problem and restart
from scratch a new version of dialog4ports, with the help of danfe, eadler and
I.
The new version is based on dialog(3), adding to it a new widget (which is
planned to be contributed upstream) and a new UI using that widget.
After months of thinking/coding/testing we have been able to switch to this new
UI and get rid of the old dialog(1) for make config.
It should probably check for use of
/usr/ports/Tools/scripts/dialogwrapper.sh in /etc/make.conf. I doubt
the two will work together.
dialogwrapper should be useless now isn't it?
It did three things:
Cut long descriptions for old versions of dialog(1) (pre 9.x). This was
needed to avoid a bug in dialog(1).
Show long descriptions on current versions of dialog(1).
Use the full height and width of the window for config options.
As far as I know, dialog4ports only does the third.
dialogwrapper was announced on -ports and -ports-announce in September
along with a request to test. The people using it should at least get a
warning if it is not compatible with dialog4ports.
_______________________________________________
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"
