On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 04:04:49PM -0500, Scot Hetzel wrote: > On 7/20/06, Andrew Pantyukhin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I wonder if it's possible to resolve the situation when > >(defined(WITH_GNUTLS) && !defined(WITHOUT_SSL)) in a > >friendlier way than a simple IGNORE. I have WITH_GNUTLS > >in my make.conf and I don't have WITHOUT_SSL there. It > >would be great if you could make the port choose on its own, > >either way would be perfect. > > > > I had a look at the ports Makefile, and there is only one thing that > is holding the port back, from doing what you want. The port defines: > > .if !defined(WITHOUT_SSL) > USE_OPENSSL= yes > .endif > > before it includes bsd.port.pre.mk. If this could be included after > the bsd.port.pre.mk, then the port could have been made to work as you > wanted. Since USE_OPENSSL is defined in bsd.port.pre.mk, it needs to > be defined before this *.mk file. If it could be moved into > bsd.port.post.mk, then the ports Makefile could be changed as follows; [snip would-be-nice patch moving USE_OPENSSL after the OPTIONS processing]
Yes, this was indeed the main problem I had with OPTIONS'ifying the curl port - the fact that USE_OPENSSL cannot be reconciled with the options handling framework, simply because it needs to be defined before including bsd.port.pre.mk. Your patch is good, and it would really be nice if it could be applied, but unfortunately, it is not possible for the present :) And to Andrew - as noted above, unfortunately, for the present it is not possible to only use OpenSSL if WITH_GNUTLS is *not* specified, simply because the USE_OPENSSL processing is done before any options processing, and it has to be that way :( G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 .siht ekil ti gnidaer eb d'uoy ,werbeH ni erew ecnetnes siht fI
pgp6kVWvwn50a.pgp
Description: PGP signature
