suggestion for adding a l10n-capable doc-format navi

[Simon L. Nielsen]

On 2003.04.20 19:52:05 +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote:

>  How about the following:
> 
>   1) WITH_FOO is defined and WITH_FOO!=NO, it means YES.
>   2) WITH_FOO is defined and WITH_FOO==NO, it means NO.
>   3) WITH_FOO is not defined, it means NO.

Personally I think this is a bad idea since most other places in the
FreeBSD makefiles it is only important if the variabel is set or not.

>  A problem of that defining of WITH_FOO always means YES is that
>  we cannot disable it if it is enabled by default in Makefile
>  using WITH_FOO?=YES.  But as you pointed out, in other places
>  this sort of variables that is defined mean YES regardless of what
>  the value was.  The above behavior is not against the old one, I think.

The way the disabled case is handled some other places is by using a
NO_FOO or NOFOO variable which then takes precedents over the WITH_FOO
variable e.g. by :

.if defined(NO_FOO)
.undef WITH_FOO
.endif

I know this seems more troublesome but IMHO it is preferable since it is
more consitent with all the other FreeBSD makefiles.

I think it would be more intuitive if setting a make variable to NO
really disabled the variable in all the FreeBSD makefiles but since it
doesn't I think it is more or less impossible to remember when using NO
is ok and when it is not.

I know this seems like a bike shed (and probably is a bit) but I think
consitency is rather important.

-- 
Simon L. Nielsen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/attachments/20030420/322fec66/attachment.sig>