From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 23 00:13:31 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE2016A41F for ; Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:13:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: from relay.rdsnet.ro (gimli.rdsnet.ro [193.231.236.70]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F6DA43D70 for ; Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:13:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: (qmail 13566 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2005 00:13:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.rdsnet.ro) (62.231.74.130) by smtp1-133.rdsnet.ro with SMTP; 23 Nov 2005 00:13:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 29943 invoked by uid 89); 23 Nov 2005 00:13:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO it.buh.tecnik93.com) (81.196.204.98) by 0 with SMTP; 23 Nov 2005 00:13:08 -0000 Received: from it.buh.tecnik93.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by it.buh.tecnik93.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB5FAB847; Wed, 23 Nov 2005 02:13:05 +0200 (EET) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 02:13:02 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu To: pav@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20051123021302.4f93a01d@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <1132704123.47320.21.camel@localhost> References: <200511222220.jAMMK1bB012364@freefall.freebsd.org> <20051123003447.7046be7d@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <1132699378.47320.12.camel@localhost> <20051123005108.14ffff2e@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <1132700575.47320.16.camel@localhost> <20051123014454.20ea3d62@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <1132704123.47320.21.camel@localhost> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.100 (GTK+ 2.8.7; i386-portbld-freebsd6.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/89300: [MAINTAINER] multimedia/bsdav: remove BROKEN X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 00:13:32 -0000 On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 01:02:03 +0100 Pav Lucistnik wrote: > Ion-Mihai Tetcu p=C3=AD=C5=A1e v st 23. 11. 2005 v 01:44 +0200: >=20 > > > Third, you used OPTIONS incorrectly. I fixed that. For details, > > > see chapter in PH. > >=20 > > I see that: > > -.ifdef(WITH_X11) > > +.if !defined(WITHOUT_X11) > >=20 > > OK, if one does not what X it will put make.conf WITHOUT_X11=3D yes; > > so the port actually works (OPTIONS-wise) but one should use > > WITHOUT_X11 and this is said in PH. >=20 > No, that's not the reason.=20 Actually it's said to use WITHOUT_X11 but yes, the rest is more important. > Please read OPTIONS chapter in Porter's Handbook. It says, quote: >=20 > Due to a deficiency in the infrastructure, you can only test WITH_* > variables for options, which are OFF by default, and WITHOUT_* > variables for options, which defaults to ON. Read it, but on fast-forward :-/ It would be very nice if portlint(1) could catch this (AFAIK it check if either WITH_ or WITHOUT_ is defined for each OPTION). I think I should start checking my other ports. Thanks for spelling this to me. --=20 IOnut - Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" BOFH excuse #27: radiosity depletion