From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 22 19:08:43 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4691A1065670; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 19:08:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06DAC8FC28; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 19:08:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.3/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o2MIxbod028271; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:59:37 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:59:37 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20100322.125937.278730673160410010.imp@bsdimp.com> To: Alexander@Leidinger.net From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20100322172104.14234yawbsev0sw8@webmail.leidinger.net> References: <20100322123408.16671ijbvmcyux80@webmail.leidinger.net> <201003220941.10525.jhb@freebsd.org> <20100322172104.14234yawbsev0sw8@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.3 on Emacs 22.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: rwatson@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CTF patch for testing/review X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 19:08:43 -0000 In message: <20100322172104.14234yawbsev0sw8@webmail.leidinger.net> Alexander Leidinger writes: : Normally we use MK_xxx for things which are opt-in/opt-out. What about : using MK_xxx instead of ENABLE_CTF? If people are in favour of MK_xxx, : what should the xxx part look like? Normally we *TEST* MK_XXX for things which are opt-in/opt-out and require the user to say WITH_XXX or WITHOUT_XXX if they don't like the default (or want to ensure they get option XXX, even if we turn it off by default in the future). The default then gets encoded in bsd.own.mk, and permeates the FreeBSD build system since we include that everywhere, directly or indirectly. The problem is that bsd.own.mk is not included in sys.mk, nor should it be. That's why we have the hacky combination of WITH_CTF and NO_CTF that's there today. : Is bsd.kern.mk included in module builds too? Yes. Warner