From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 22 07:10:40 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DB56106564A for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 07:10:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from k0802647@telus.net) Received: from defout.telus.net (defout.telus.net [204.209.205.13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE1838FC14 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 07:10:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from edmwcm03 ([204.209.205.13]) by priv-edmwes48.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.8.01.03.00 201-2260-125-20100507) with ESMTP id <20110422071033.JZA9094.priv-edmwes48.telusplanet.net@edmwcm03> for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 01:10:33 -0600 Received: from oliver.bc.lan ([50.92.188.219]) by edmwcm03 with bizsmtp id aXAY1g00b4kTNxu01XAY9T; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 01:10:33 -0600 X-Telus-Outbound-IP: 50.92.188.219 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=WnW4EIPqW+UOuPrckVMDJ6NmVUA+0GaxzzKoDf/5uIg= c=1 sm=2 a=jVez_htjv6wA:10 a=aBk6xWbDc1QA:10 a=LGgl8L9ij00A:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=banPegBVpYoQ6qeaEXIA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 Received: from [10.111.111.111] (unknown [10.111.111.111]) by oliver.bc.lan (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE3F462B2; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 00:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4DB1297E.6090205@telus.net> Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 00:08:46 -0700 From: Carl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk , freebsd@edvax.de References: <4DB0F34B.9030008@telus.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: building a port with very long list of build options X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 07:10:40 -0000 On 2011-04-21 8:52 PM, Polytropon wrote: > This has been possible and common in the past. For example, > the many options for the mplayer and mencoder ports could > be specified in a file, so changing of a port's file was > not needed. I'm not fully sure this option is still present, > but at least on v7 it worked. > > Create a file Makefile.local in the port's directory and > specify all your options as desired. This file will be > sourced when you issue a "make" command and will override > settings of the regular Makefile (e. g. if you want > different CFLAGS for _this_ port). The file is to be in > the known syntax, NAME=value. Does that solution allow for locating Makefile.local outside the ports tree so as not to contaminate builds for other targets using the same ports tree? On 2011-04-21 9:11 PM, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote: > If you read the make manual page , you will see the following option : > > ... > > *-f* *makefile* > Specify a makefile to read instead of the default one. > > ... > > which is used as > > make -f your_own_make_file_name > > This form will override the Makefile present in the current directory > and will use the specified make file with name your_own_make_file_name . Yes, I did see that, but I interpreted that to mean my make file *replaces* the original, in which case I would need to populate my make file not only with the list of build options I want but also a copy of everything in the original make file. If I'm correct, that doesn't seem to me to be a good idea from a maintenance perspective. I was hoping for something like the -f option that somehow inserted rather than replaced. Carl / K0802647