On 27/03/2011 21:40, Subbsd wrote:
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:19:44PM +0400, Subbsd wrote:
Ive wanted to ask why the option of vim port has not yet been handed
via dialog by default. Personally, to make them work, we must define
WITH_OPTIO
> I expected to hear that just so happened historically. Тext question I
> ask only to satisfy my interest. What OPTIONS framework basically can
> someone not like it?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2010-October/063914.html
--
Eitan Adler
_
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Erik Trulsson wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:19:44PM +0400, Subbsd wrote:
>> Ive wanted to ask why the option of vim port has not yet been handed
>> via dialog by default. Personally, to make them work, we must define
>> WITH_OPTIONS=yes in make.conf (or WITH
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:19:44PM +0400, Subbsd wrote:
> Ive wanted to ask why the option of vim port has not yet been handed
> via dialog by default. Personally, to make them work, we must define
> WITH_OPTIONS=yes in make.conf (or WITH_VIM_OPTIONS=yes). Life without
> it is so difficult ;)
Beca
Ive wanted to ask why the option of vim port has not yet been handed
via dialog by default. Personally, to make them work, we must define
WITH_OPTIONS=yes in make.conf (or WITH_VIM_OPTIONS=yes). Life without
it is so difficult ;)
___
freebsd-questions@fre
