Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 14:26:37 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 181301] [NEW PORT] net/kamailio: Very fast and configurable open source SIP proxy Message-ID: <bug-181301-13-UUZl4MXJCP@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-181301-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-181301-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181301 --- Comment #18 from olivermahmoudi@gmail.com --- (In reply to John Marino from comment #14) > (In reply to olivermahmoudi from comment #13) > > ### Version 1 > > .if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MMYSQL} > > BUILD_DEPENDS+= > > ${LOCALBASE}/libexec/mysqld:${PORTSDIR}/databases/mysql56-server > > RUN_DEPENDS+:= ${BUILD_DEPENDS} > > EXTRA_MODULES+= db_mysql > > PLIST_SUB+= MYSQL="" > > .else > > PLIST_SUB+= MYSQL="@comment " > > .endif > > > > ### Version 2 > > OPTIONS_SUB=yes > > .if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MMYSQL} > > BUILD_DEPENDS+= > > ${LOCALBASE}/libexec/mysqld:${PORTSDIR}/databases/mysql56-server > > RUN_DEPENDS+:= ${BUILD_DEPENDS} > > EXTRA_MODULES+= db_mysql > > .endif > > > > whereas: > > Version 1 == Version 2 > > > > then I can see what you mean and could update things to Version 2 via > > OPTIONS_SUB. What I would essentially be carving out is this bit: > > > > PLIST_SUB+= MYSQL="" > > .else > > PLIST_SUB+= MYSQL="@comment " > > > > and it would still work. > > > > Is this the point you were trying to make? > > yes, but you can go even further. e.g. > > > ### Version 3 > OPTIONS_SUB=yes > MYSQL_BUILD_DEPENDS= > ${LOCALBASE}/libexec/mysqld:${PORTSDIR}/databases/mysql56-server > MYSQL_RUN_DEPENDS= > ${LOCALBASE}/libexec/mysqld:${PORTSDIR}/databases/mysql56-server > .include <bsd.options.mk> > .if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MMYSQL} > EXTRA_MODULES+= db_mysql > .endif > > > > See? > > (btw, the mailing list has no authority here) Yeah, the penny has dropped. Where I got a little confused here, was the part where I have several conditions to take care of inside the if statements at the same time. A prove of the concept as outlined in the Porter's Handbook would be to break one big if statement down into several smaller ones and then the OPTIONS_SUB approach is truly equivalent. Thanks -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-181301-13-UUZl4MXJCP>