tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Proposed changes to devel/cunit



Alexander Vasarab <alexander+nettp%vasaconsulting.com@localhost> writes:

> One point made in the IRC discussion is that packages should have sane
> defaults so that when the bulk build process picks up for the binary
> packages, users don't receive a crippled program. But that wouldn't
> happen in this case as the options configuration would mirror that of
> the project (that is, curses "off", memtrace "off", other three "on").

The tricky part is to decide between missing/defective and bloat.

For curses, it probably makes sense to avoid it, to keep cunit leaner.
For the three you are proposing to default to on, how many people do you
expect would ever want to disable them?  It may be that just having them
on without an option would be fine (but I have not looked).

Would you see the 3 cunit variants building without curses and being
useful, in the state you propose?

(What you're doing sounds basically reasonable, modulo that options and
binary packages are always awkward.)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index