Feature request clean-up of flags.

Alain De Vos

Alain De Vos

The package fcl has the flag:
SSE41

The package kodi has the flag:
SSE4_1

Probably the same thing...

Gentoo contains a description of each individual flag. This is a plus.
For freebsd there is not an "inventary" of flags.
 
Alain De Vos said:
For freebsd there is not an "inventary" of flags.
Click to expand...
Wrong (although you obviously mean options): https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/Mk/bsd.options.desc.mk

In short, not every possible option can be named there, still semantically same options should have the same name, so just open a PR about one of these ports.

But then, "optimization" options are a shady area. Just forget about them. We don't need the Gentoo Ricer here ?

(edit: no offense towards Gentoo intended, this just picks on a specific type of Gentoo user vastly overestimating the benefit of compiler "optimizations" while lacking some other understanding as well ... been seen in the wild)
 
zirias@ said:
not every possible option can be named there
Click to expand...
^ (!)

It would make NO sense at all trying to keep each and every single option any port offers in some central place. bsd.options.desc.mk is meant for frequently used options.
 
I understand, but I repeat my claim. There exist for FreeBSD not a central place for all possible "options" & "decription".
It exists for Gentoo as far as i understand.
 
I guess you're confusing something. From a quick glance at "portage" docs, I see all they offer is "USE flags". There's no 1:1 mapping to FreeBSD ports. FreeBSD ports offer "DEFAULT_VERSIONS" and individual port options, some of which are named in a central file cause they are used by many ports. So, these "USE flags" (that are centrally defined by nature) probably correspond to DEFAULT_VERSIONS plus some subset of commonly used options (more or less those named in bsd.options.desc.mk).

I personally don't like the restrictions this imposes and very much prefer that any port can declare options that only make sense for this specific port. And yes, if you have "similar" options in a few ports, that are still not "commonly used", you should try to name them the same. If you find some inconsistency there, just file a PR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top