From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org Thu May 5 20:29:18 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D3EB2E08B for ; Thu, 5 May 2016 20:29:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BC791C90 for ; Thu, 5 May 2016 20:29:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u45KTIxc022247 for ; Thu, 5 May 2016 20:29:18 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 209185] USE_LDCONFIG and not-shared *.so files Date: Thu, 05 May 2016 20:29:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Ports Framework X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: vladimir.chukharev@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Resolution: Not A Bug X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: portmgr@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: exp-run? X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 May 2016 20:29:18 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D209185 --- Comment #3 from vladimir.chukharev@gmail.com --- Indeed, it's not a bug, it's a feature request. ('Rejected' would be more appropriate as the resolution, IMHO.)=20 It's not about portlint. portlint just shows the same doubts as a new maintainer has: does the port need to run ldconfig or not? Yes, using USE_LDCONFIG=3Dno helps both maintainer and portlint, but that is a good si= de effect only. Additional positive side of the requested feature is that it closes a small POLA violation. If I can set a variable to 'yes', then I expect that I also= can use 'no'. (And note that 'yes' is merely a short form for '${PREFIX}/lib', = i.e. it's redundant.) I do not demand to re-open this PR, but it would be nice to see a better reasoning for rejection. May be, a proposed form of a comment for this purp= ose? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=