Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 10:40:26 +0100 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> To: Carl <k0802647@telus.net> Cc: Manolis Kiagias <sonicy@otenet.gr>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: building a port with very long list of build options Message-ID: <BANLkTim-7kJ3L7zkaSOc36RJqpc6rxNUpw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4DB3DED3.4080901@telus.net> References: <4DB0F34B.9030008@telus.net> <BANLkTinn53mqc=2rkWqMAqZJvdK-vydP7A@mail.gmail.com> <4DB1297E.6090205@telus.net> <4DB12F2F.8020306@otenet.gr> <4DB162BC.3030206@otenet.gr> <4DB3DED3.4080901@telus.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24 Apr 2011 09:29, "Carl" <k0802647@telus.net> wrote: > > On 2011-04-22 4:13 AM, Manolis Kiagias wrote: >> >> On 04/22/2011 10:33 AM, Manolis Kiagias wrote: >>> >>> On 04/22/2011 10:08 AM, Carl wrote: >>>>> >>>>> 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 . >>>> >>>> make -f 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 >>> >>> Assuming you have already selected some options during make config, you >>> could try adding your own to the file /var/db/ports/<portname>/options >>> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> A probably more elegant way is to use the ports-mgmt/portconf port. >> This allows per port settings to be applied, which are honored by make, >> portupgrade and the other tools. Just install and use >> /usr/local/etc/ports.conf to add your options: >> >> Here is the sample supplied with the portconf: >> >> editors/openoffice.org-2: WITH_CCACHE|LOCALIZED_LANG=it >> print/ghostscript-* print/lpr-wrapper: A4 >> sysutils/fusefs-kmod*: !KERNCONF | !NOPORTDOCS >> www/firefox-i18n: WITHOUT_SWITCHER | FIREFOX_I18N=fr it >> x11/fakeport: CONFIGURE_ARGS=--with-modules="aaa bbb ccc" > > > ports-mgmt/portconf certainly does look to be a very appealing solution in general, but am I wrong in thinking that it provides me with no way to address my original problem? How do I use it when I've got an exceptionally long list of options for a particular port? > > As for manually customizing /var/db/ports/<portname>/options, the port builds in question are done in a clean chroot using a batch process, so "make config" doesn't happen and /var/db/ports/<portname>/options never exists. > How about my earlier suggestion of populating a 'makefile' no capitals with the appropriate WITH and WITHOUT flags defined, then .include-ing the original Makefile? Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTim-7kJ3L7zkaSOc36RJqpc6rxNUpw>