On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, L. V. Lammert wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Marc Espie wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:30:02AM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote: > > > If a command line tool like git has a 'GUI Helper', then that package is > > > broken (which, I believe, is the case in this situation). > > > > You don't get it, so I'll explain it. > > > Yes, I DO get it, but, unfortunately, you don't. Having an 'X' version of > something as fundamental as a version control system is just plain dumb. > That has nothing to do with flavors! What if CVS required X? I doubt it > would be in the tree for more than 30 seconds, if it got committed at all. > > As the maintainer explained some time ago, there has been a no-X11 version > of GIT since April, so the question is, really, why that isn't the > package. Good suggestion, I think you would agree.
You know, if you spent 1/10th of the effort that you have wasted ranting on learning the ports system then you could have modified the port to place the X11-requiring bits in a subpackage already. It isn't hard at all. Nobody cares about your rants, but if you make a patch then you have a solution. -d
