svn commit: r367002 - head/devel/cmake

[Adam Weinberger]

On 2 Sep, 2014, at 12:11, John Marino <freebsd.contact at marino.st> wrote:

> On 9/2/2014 17:57, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>> On 2 Sep, 2014, at 11:47, John Marino <freebsd.contact at marino.st>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 9/2/2014 17:42, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>>>> On 2 Sep, 2014, at 11:40, John Marino
>>>> <freebsd.contact at marino.st>
>>>>>>> I understand that installing man pages is mandatory, that
>>>>>>> it should not be OPTION controlled.  A lot of ports use
>>>>>>> sphinx so I don't know what the big deal about sphinx in
>>>>>>> particular is, but lets say it's something else far worse.
>>>>>>> man pages could be pregenerated and installed from $FILEDIR
>>>>>>> right?  So there are alternatives, but unless I'm wrong
>>>>>>> about the policy using OPTIONS is not one of them (but I'm
>>>>>>> wrong a lot, so let's see what the answer is).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> How do you mean mandatory?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> OPTIONS_DEFINE+=	MANPAGES OPTIONS_DEFAULT+=	MANPAGES 
>>>>>> MANPAGES_CONFIGURE_ON=	--sphinx-man
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> By mandatory, I mean that a port that does that is violating 
>>>>> policy. Documentation is optional (DOCS) but manpages are not. 
>>>>> That's what I've understood.  I've see ports that tried the
>>>>> above and I've removed code of that equivalent.
>>>>> 
>>>>> John
>>>> 
>>>> If it’s on by default I don’t see the problem. Who are we to
>>>> decide that nobody should ever be allowed to build a port without
>>>> manpages?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> If it's the policy, it's the policy.
>> 
>> That’s ridiculous. Where’s that policy? There’s MANPAGES_DESC in
>> bsd.options.desc.mk. I’m not the first person to think up disabling
>> manpages.
>> 
>> 80 ports have a MANPAGES option. Should I let all 80 of those
>> maintainers know that you decided they can’t have that option
>> anymore?
> 
> 
> I don't know if/where it's written, that's what I was told.  However, it
> makes sense.  You want uniformity.  I have no moral issues fixing 80
> violations and saying to the maintainers that never should have made it
> through a review, and use pregenerated man pages if they don't like it.
> 
> All this hinges on *if* it is indeed a policy.  If it is, it should be
> enforced.

Okay well, until you’re finished writing up your new policy, can we make an option to prevent bringing in a dozen unneeded dependencies?

# Adam


-- 
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
http://www.adamw.org

> 
> 
> 
>>> However, I sorta kinda think a <bsd.port.mk> option to not package
>>> man pages for all ports may be coming for embedded usage.  That
>>> won't solve this dependency that you are trying to fix, but it will
>>> solve the "i don't need manpages for any port" issue.
>>> 
>>> Sphinx is not like tex though.  It's really not a big deal
>>> practically speaking.
>> 
>> Bringing in a dozen dependencies is EXACTLY what options is designed
>> for.
> 
> But options aren't designed to bypass policy, that's the point.
> 
> John