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:


No electrons were mamed while sending this message. Only slightly bruised.

freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to