From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 30 22:42:28 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33A781065839 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:42:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mezz7@cox.net) Received: from eastrmmtao101.cox.net (eastrmmtao101.cox.net [68.230.240.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A98CB8FC0C for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:42:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mezz7@cox.net) Received: from eastrmimpo02.cox.net ([68.1.16.120]) by eastrmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20080730224227.RBXA11636.eastrmmtao101.cox.net@eastrmimpo02.cox.net>; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:42:27 -0400 Received: from mezz.mezzweb.com ([24.255.149.218]) by eastrmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id wNiS1Z0084iy4EG02NiSUz; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:42:27 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:42:33 -0500 To: "Marcin Wisnicki" From: "Jeremy Messenger" Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20080730085123.81542622.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> <8543.59269510514$1217453541@news.gmane.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.51 (Linux) Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems with portupgrade && xscreensaver-gnome X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:42:28 -0000 On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:09:11 -0500, Marcin Wisnicki wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:30:50 +0100, RW wrote: > >> I think Bill probably understands that. The issue, as I see it, is that >> the warning will just be a warning if you build manually, but if you >> build through portupgrade it causes it to fail. >> >> If the intent was to stop the build then IGNORE should have been set >> instead. > > Well the intent was to warn the user that without PAM, keyring > functionality will be disabled. You are right there needs to be some info > about that in KEYRING option description. > > If .warning breaks portupgrade I can change it to IGNORE. I prefer remove .warning and IGNORE. If user wants to enable keyring then the WITH_KEYRING should be always enable PAM, no matter if user has selected it disable. And, tweak comment in OPTIONS for (reqiure PAM). Cheers, Mezz -- mezz7@cox.net - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org