On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 13:51:11 +0000 Matt Smith <f...@xtaz.co.uk> wrote
> On Dec 23 07:44, Mark Felder wrote: > > > >It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely > >lightweight pinentry-compatible program to depend on so we can kill the > >dependency bloat and have a simple shell-based password entry option. > > > >Anyone up for a weekend challenge? :-) > > There has been another thread on this mailing list discussing making the > port honour the WITHOUT_X11 and OPTIONS_UNSET+=X11 options from > make.conf which would make it only depend on security/pinentry-curses > instead of security/pinentry. This seems like a good solution to me. It > would mean if one of those options is set it will only drag in a single > dependancy rather than all the X11 libraries and GTK. A quick look @ the security/pinentry Makefile, indicates that the request for this type of modification is trivial. It simply requires reversing the (PORT_)OPTIONS logic -- this port could completed in under 5 minutes. So unless instructed otherwise, I'll go ahead with this. One last question; pinentry-console, or pinentry-nox? Best wishes. --Chris > > -- > Matt > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
