From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 24 09:40:28 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 A1E8C1065670 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:40:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com (mail-bw0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 203978FC18 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:40:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz12 with SMTP id 12so1755983bwz.13 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:40:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=vFPRX+/tOdy+ExFXYMxWqWxBFcV+LxD5CIh2HhOZ9dY=; b=EkyAUq/zgnEWw4FCJsuW1R+avpWO+zQR4lxoEoaEOwyYWm0+cMkesAUvjIR0FO47e3 rC3p39Bt/uUyLN+fdmxKz9hj1n+/Eeuw9gFgdZZq6ap4zPVhwaBh2SvmHjZ3jwKSYKo8 z6N49VLE7Xp76a6Q44c8H8mXHjqR2lrm0kqds= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=Rs2Qp+/xm8WyCd/eXNUmvQSr1LURR0PdTfgDAZl7Zc4+vCCE0P8mgniRTenrmEN1S5 wQsZUWUW2wJi6WbTfxQjcBUFjq1PwfcTI1cqYh87IsIGpfN9PiS+RHMeyiutTJJMdP9m r2rYfmSHdjrcbXC761dWnqsOB+CVgt7VmOBok= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.19.76 with SMTP id z12mr2342152bka.205.1303638026842; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.42.21 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.42.21 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:40:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DB3DED3.4080901@telus.net> References: <4DB0F34B.9030008@telus.net> <4DB1297E.6090205@telus.net> <4DB12F2F.8020306@otenet.gr> <4DB162BC.3030206@otenet.gr> <4DB3DED3.4080901@telus.net> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 10:40:26 +0100 Message-ID: From: Chris Rees To: Carl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Manolis Kiagias , 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 Reply-To: utisoft@gmail.com List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:40:28 -0000 On 24 Apr 2011 09:29, "Carl" 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//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//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//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