From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 23 01:12:33 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE6716A4B3 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 01:12:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.datanet.hu (mx2.datanet.hu [194.149.13.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C07A43FB1 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 01:12:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sziszi@bsd.hu) Received: from momo.buza.adamsfamily.xx (nilus-177.adsl.datanet.hu [195.56.48.177]) by mx2.datanet.hu (DataNet) with ESMTP id BEF893915FD for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 10:12:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from momo.buza.adamsfamily.xx (localhost [127.0.0.1]) h9N8CaXM001883 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 10:12:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sziszi@bsd.hu) Received: (from sziszi@localhost)h9N8CaoZ001882 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 10:12:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sziszi@bsd.hu) X-Authentication-Warning: momo.buza.adamsfamily.xx: sziszi set sender to sziszi@bsd.hu using -f Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 10:12:35 +0200 From: Szilveszter Adam To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20031023081234.GA1716@momo.buza.adamsfamily.xx> Mail-Followup-To: Szilveszter Adam , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <3F961244.2070809@mindcore.net> <1066800070.97635.21.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1066800070.97635.21.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Subject: Re: Question on freeBSD (5.1-CURRENT) portupgrade of Perl 5.8 andlibiconv 1.9.1_3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 08:12:33 -0000 Hello, On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 01:21:10AM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 01:14, Scott W wrote: > > Also, is there a way to pass configure options to portupgrade, or should > > I run make clean && ./configure for each port in an 'upgrade chain' and > > then force portupgrade to not make clean prior to building/installing? > > Configure arguments? No. However, you can use the -m option to pass > make arguments (e.g. -DWITH_FOO). To pass configure arguments, you'd > have to edit the port Makefiles directly. There is an easier way: you can use CONFIGURE_* variables, which can also be defined on the command line. For documentation on these and on the Makefile format for ports, see the Porters Handbook. There is also pkgtools.conf, as has been noted. Hope this helps. -- Regards: Szilveszter ADAM Budapest Hungary