On 22/07/2010 11:11, Alex Dupre wrote:
Christopher Key ha scritto:
At present, the interaction between portconf and port options is
somewhat confusing.
It's not completely clear to me if you are referring to my portconf
port. If so, the interaction is really simple: portconf is complementary
to port OPTIONS, that is, it's to be used for ports that don't have
OPTIONS or, better, for knobs that are not handled by OPTIONS.
If you use it to set knobs handled by OPTIONS, you are using portconf in
the wrong way.
Hello Alex,
I was referring to any variables set on the command line, make.conf or
any linked files, so yes that I was including your portconf port.
The problem was what when I first started using portconf, I wasn't aware
that the knobs and port OPTIONS were intended to be mutually exclusive,
and not being familiar with the ports infrastructure at the time, I
found some of the resulting behaviour somewhat confusing.
If it is really desired to keep knobs and options wholly separate, then
it might at least be desirable to have a warning emitted if duplicate
WITH_XXX and WITHOUT_XXX values are detected. I would however argue
that there is some merit in having the two as parallel methods. For
example, a site wide WITHOUT_X11 might be desirable, which would be
honoured in ports that supported it as a knob, and give a suitable
default for the ports that supported it as an option. I also prefer the
idea of storing any important port options in a single file, which is
easily maintained, rather than the hierarchy of files in /var/db/ports.
Kind regards,
Christopher Key
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
