Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 02:21:34 +0000 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Suggested improvements for ports Message-ID: <20080113022134.6c34bc03@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <478930F3.2030309@FreeBSD.org> References: <ED8842DFA28376008F3CA3A4@utd59514.utdallas.edu> <4788D0E6.7080007@gmx.de> <478930F3.2030309@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:28:19 -0800 Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > Dominic Fandrey wrote: > > As the ports man page states: > > > > # make config-recursive > > > > does what you want. It's surprising how often people claim this > > feature is missing, even though it has been there ever since I > > started using FreeBSD. > > And it's surprising how often people don't listen when I explain that > config-recursive is not a complete solution. :) It builds the list > first, so that if you enable an option that creates a dependency on > another port it will be missed. Whilst this is a little irritating, and it would be nice to have it fixed, in practice it's not all that much of a problem. When installing a new port, you can simple run config-recursive twice (or until there's a clean pass). When configuring multiple origins from a script it's better to handle the recursion externally anyway, because even if config-recursive were fixed it would still be deeply inefficient.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080113022134.6c34bc03>