On 8/11/07, Hajimu UMEMOTO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > >>>>> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:03:32 -0500 > >>>>> "Scot Hetzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > swhetzel> I believe when I made the change to bsd.database.mk, and then > patched > swhetzel> all of the BDB using ports, I had put the lowest version that the > port > swhetzel> supported into USE_BDB. > > swhetzel> USE_BDB=yes would also work and allow the port to show a > dependancy on > swhetzel> the default BDB version instead of the lowest BDB version. Also, > swhetzel> INVALID_BDB_VER takes care of excluding BDB versions that the port > swhetzel> doesn't work with. > > Yes, it is same as my understanding. So, I think a user doesn't > specify WITH_BSD_VER explicitly, exim will use db40, while other ports > which use bsd.database.mk use db41. > That would be true, except that the exim port is setting WITH_BDB_VER?=1 to use the system BDB by default.
I have now fixed it so that the exim port doesn't need to set WITH_BDB_VER?=1 anymore. Instead setting either WITH_BDB or WITH_BDB_VER > 1 will make the port use Mk/bsd.database.mk to choose the version of BDB to use, otherwise it will default to the system BDB. The updated patch is in PR 115427: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=115427 Scot -- DISCLAIMER: No electrons were mamed while sending this message. Only slightly bruised. _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"