On Jan 16, 2008 10:50 AM, Landry Breuil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:39:42AM -0300, Federico Schwindt wrote: > > > [..] > > > > > > > > we stated many times that for some ports you just need X installed. So > > > > it is no problem. > > > > > > Yes, some ports. Some ports there is no option at all. In this case there > > > is an > > > option. So either the port uses multi packages or it uses a no_x11 > > > FLAVOR. The > > > no_x11 FLAVOR is the better choice. > > > > FWIW, I agree 100% with Brad. > > If you look at the whole thread, having a flavor was the original > idea from the OP, so if more people consider it the best option, > we should have a look at it instead of trying to make this port > a multipackage. > > Comments on the original diff ? > http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=119456375313172&w=2 > We take this as a starting point and add a no_x11 flavor ?
I've read the whole thread and my point is that it's perfectly fine to have a no_x11 flavor (as opposed to other people's opinion). I've looked at it quickly and looks fine except for the BINARIES define that seems unneeded/unused but I will try it and comment as soon as I can. f.-
