Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 04:43:51 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Tilman Linneweh <arved@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/36112: [PATCH] New feature for whole ports tree: GS_PORT variable Message-ID: <20030728114351.GA53070@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20030727221222.GA93833@huckfinn.arved.de> References: <200307272105.h6RL5BTo000730@helo.liwing.de> <20030727221222.GA93833@huckfinn.arved.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 12:12:22AM +0200, Tilman Linneweh wrote: > Just picking a random PR. > Instead of adding knobs to every port, a more > generic solution might be appropriate, e.g. a bsd.port.mk patch. > > > Oh, and I am not the first one with this idea. > > PR 36112 by lev tries to introduce a IMHO better solution. I thought I had replied recently to that PR (I'll add this mail as a reply to that PR so we can record the rest of this thread). I also like this approach, but would prefer a more verbose variable name (i.e. GHOSTSCRIPT_PORT) so that it's less cryptic. I'm not sure about the need for GS_PORTSUFFIX though: if someone wants to avoid X11 support then they would set GHOSTSCRIPT_PORT to print/ghostscript-gnu-nox11 (and set WITHOUT_X11) so that none of their ports that use gs pull in the X dependency. ImageMagick just happens to be about the only port that provides for this facility at the moment, by checking WITHOUT_X11 explicitly. Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030728114351.GA53070>