From nobody Thu Apr 11 06:51:17 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4VFVlH0sQNz5GqBQ for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 06:53:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 6yearold@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vk1-f170.google.com (mail-vk1-f170.google.com [209.85.221.170]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VFVlG66lQz4R5Z for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 06:53:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 6yearold@gmail.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-vk1-f170.google.com with SMTP id 71dfb90a1353d-4dae8b2d29bso1257632e0c.0 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 23:53:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712818393; x=1713423193; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=zNusoinDJEv58bdXhZwnSUFK/Ku2sv5IOuneDi7Marw=; b=AdPrC2pqBti1HNPrve4dFUlInwqBW1GbKIud5QPyNTOKA9MjVTvf004q1PR9Atu+lW 2qLBttLORxh53Q7Hi0LLOMCVpExftTvO7KI8tRyMJ+TqrGQpsPdZ2541OdDelzM5aSC0 RZTKlcRzkvTHn8nDDtXa17WtyDpLoU9AluwxkL6/1BSKl+u4rEzbKgGiGDnuXR5VCOhf brsTpqsKqQrO9dGaGh/EsPIegLrBRzUIaMqp4484D2cIkYoBPgLa89SGA3BwGi8fMDcp SQZvPKptmodsIgbNNWuArgcp8cXLLXxfC88BJNQbXrABn3SJyESuIh6lwCS9wsMJw/Vo kP6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz9Hp1+Tb5ZVQYWemk3K5gRspBk4Om9GFLQtE/DLq7ptLrQJJAn 9iEQg5mFSf6I4AVyghB7GQVWOw5btsJZkie6SGRzukKnf9KKUT6rtxyQbUp+ X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGxKxKT2exSGttQFeCAPFD0jmfF60ACpnyWnsrOVrXJ36JYdDXbmFgebj+G90iYQ9zZsJDO3w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:488f:b0:4cb:56c5:580e with SMTP id eg15-20020a056122488f00b004cb56c5580emr5924268vkb.11.1712818393548; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vs1-f52.google.com (mail-vs1-f52.google.com. [209.85.217.52]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o25-20020a056122049900b004ca7514ee1esm134054vkn.32.2024.04.10.23.53.13 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Apr 2024 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-f52.google.com with SMTP id ada2fe7eead31-479c39b78dbso3054648137.2 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:2ac6:b0:47a:3b48:7eea with SMTP id eh6-20020a0561022ac600b0047a3b487eeamr363004vsb.27.1712818393230; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Gleb Popov Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 09:51:17 +0300 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: In some places, WITH_${feature}_PORTS doesn't work To: Tatsuki Makino Cc: "freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4VFVlG66lQz4R5Z On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 9:16=E2=80=AFAM Tatsuki Makino wrote: > > Hello. > > Since everyone does not need to debug all ports, I assume the definition = is made like WITH_DEBUG_PORTS+=3Daudio/libopenshot-audio . > This has changed the variable defined from WITH_DEBUT to _WITH_DEBUG, so = the part that switches when WITH_DEBUG is defined is malfunctioning. > e.g. https: //cgit.freebsd.org /ports/tree/Mk/Uses/cmake.mk?id=3Deafdc2db= 185d15b8c12e09afb24ae3c2cec65cea#n86 > I feel like we could add some behavior conditional on WITH_DEBUG being de= fined on individual ports, but should it be _WITH_* from now on? > > Regards. > Yes, it seems you're absolutely right. Sorry for breaking this. Would like me to fix it or you'll do that yourself?