On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 5:23 AM, Jakub Lach <jakub_l...@mailplus.pl> wrote:
> Hello, > > After many years of using FreeBSD ports, I've grown into habit > of reading Makefiles each time I'm not sure if any options I'm > proposed pulls in dependencies or not. > > And then it hit me. Why should we do that? Port system already > knows if something pulls another part of it, why those build > options are not marked somehow? Ideally, described (installs > xxx/xxx) or just by another colour, just marked by "*" even. > > Am I'm missing anything? > > > > -- > Sent from: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/freebsd-ports- > f3835061.html This looks like an excellent idea. The other thing I would really appreciate is when an option moves from available to default. New options are often introduced as non-standard until stability an usefulness is determined. Many are labeled in the distribution as experimental. If I have a config for such a port and that option moves becomes a default, I never see it unless I look. I would love to see this flagged in the installation as I often have no idea of what an option really does from the half-line of text available. While the information required to determine this does not appear to be present in the database ATM, it does ppear that it is available and could be added. -- Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683 _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
