From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 3 08:43:51 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEE5C16A4CE; Mon, 3 May 2004 08:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fillmore.dyndns.org (port-212-202-49-130.reverse.qsc.de [212.202.49.130]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 652C443D1F; Mon, 3 May 2004 08:43:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com) Received: from [172.16.0.2] (helo=fillmore-labs.com) by fillmore.dyndns.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1BKfbg-0004a0-NA; Mon, 03 May 2004 17:43:50 +0200 Message-ID: <409668B4.30901@fillmore-labs.com> Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 17:43:48 +0200 From: Oliver Eikemeier Organization: Fillmore Labs GmbH - http://www.fillmore-labs.com/ MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Nottebrock References: <20040503122023.GF27940@i2.informatik.rwth-aachen.de> <40963ECD.6030901@fillmore-labs.com> <200405031728.36587.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <200405031728.36587.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9 cc: ports@freebsd.org cc: Volker Stolz Subject: Re: USE_QT_VER after including bsd.port.pre.mk? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 15:43:51 -0000 Michael Nottebrock wrote: > On Monday 03 May 2004 14:45, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > >>Volker Stolz wrote: >> >>>For one of my ports, portlint now complaints: >>>FATAL: Makefile [61]: USE_QT_VER is set after including bsd.port.pre.mk. >>> >>>I'm really at a loss on how to fix this, since USE_QT_VER depends on >>>OPTIONS in my case. Is there something like an approved workaround? >>>E.g. splitting this in master/slave(s)? >> >>A fix would be son-of-PR 64233, but currently that's far behind in my >>queue, because it's absolutely no fun to work on it. > > So why was portlint changed prematurely? Surely confusing port maintainers > serves no purpose? It wasn't changed prematurely. You have to specify USE_QT_VER *before* including bsd.port.pre.mk, using OPTIONS or not. OTOH, you can only check OPTIONS *after* including bsd.port.pre.mk. IMHO both are bugs in bsd.port.mk, see also the discussion in PR 57496. As a workaround I (personally) refrain from using OPTIONS in my ports until the problems are fixed. -Oliver