From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 24 15:24:35 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B99B16A4A7; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:24:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from flz@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp1-g19.free.fr (smtp1-g19.free.fr [212.27.42.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 879E643DAE; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:23:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from flz@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.xbsd.org (unknown [82.233.2.192]) by smtp1-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B8D3054; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:23:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost.xbsd.org [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.xbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A286711A81; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:23:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.xbsd.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (srv1.xbsd.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65231-06; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:23:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [193.95.134.156] (mayday.esat.net [193.95.134.156]) by smtp.xbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A26F4119BF; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:23:42 +0200 (CEST) From: Florent Thoumie To: Ruslan Ermilov In-Reply-To: <20061024134800.GB20819@rambler-co.ru> References: <20061020150848.GQ53114@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20061020191332.GC59856@rambler-co.ru> <20061021162635.GS53114@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20061021172533.GA69551@rambler-co.ru> <20061022153436.GW53114@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20061024134800.GB20819@rambler-co.ru> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-7CmOY925DK8Sg1yeLPjd" Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 16:23:40 +0100 Message-Id: <1161703420.16172.23.camel@mayday.esat.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at xbsd.org Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, Jeremie Le Hen Subject: Re: src.conf(5) seems to affect ports build X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 15:24:35 -0000 --=-7CmOY925DK8Sg1yeLPjd Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 17:48 +0400, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 05:34:36PM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > > Ruslan, > >=20 > > On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 09:25:33PM +0400, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > > Also, your patch avoids performing the WITH(OUT)_* stuff for ports = in > > > > order to prevent from polluting the namespace. If there is to be > > > > some WITH(OUT)_* knobs which leads to CFLAGS modification in the fu= ture > > > > (I'm thinking about ProPolice with the upcoming GCC 4.1), wouldn't = it > > > > be worth benefiting this framework for ports ? > > > > > > It avoids only /etc/src.conf stuff when running bsd.port.mk; if you p= ut > > > WITH(OUT)_* in /etc/make.conf it will still be picked up. > >=20 > > Yes indeed, but MK_FOO won't be set and this would require to either > > duplicate the code that modifies CFLAGS, or at least test for MK_FOO > > or WITH_FOO at the same time. > >=20 > > Let me show you an example. > >=20 > > I have an additional that is included from both bsd.sys.mk > > and bsd.port.mk: > >=20 > > % .if ${MK_SSP} !=3D "no" > > % SSP_CFLAGS ?=3D -fstack-protector > > % CFLAGS +=3D ${SSP_CFLAGS} > > % . if defined(WARNS) && ${WARNS} >=3D 7 && !empty(SSP_CFLAGS) > > % CWARNFLAGS +=3D -Wstack-protector > > % . endif > > % .endif > >=20 > > Currently it is thus quite useful to use MK_SSP when this file is > > included from bsd.ports.mk. With your whole patch I would have to > > either duplicate these bits in bsd.ports.mk or turn the condition to > > something like: > >=20 > > % .if (defined(MK_SSP) && ${MK_SSP} !=3D "no") || defined(WITH_SSP) > >=20 > > What do you advice me to do ? > >=20 > I still don't understand why my patch created a problem for you. > This option is not in bsd.own.mk, so it's not covered by my patch. > All my patch does is "don't process /etc/src.conf" which is entirely > for src/. >=20 > So, you can continue to use your bsd.ssp.mk as before, and my patch > shouldn't influence it. >=20 > If you want to really mimic the standard behavior, then bsd.ssp.mk > should check the (WITH|WITHOUT)_SSP set by a user, and set MK_SSP > to "yes/no", accordingly; setting MK_SSP by a user shouldn't be > allowed or supported. You then set WITH_SSP=3D in /etc/make.conf > (or in /etc/src.conf if you want it only for src/), or pass > -DWITH_SSP on the make command line, and you're done. >=20 > P.S. There has been a patch floating around that adds support for > /etc/ports.conf. [...] that you sent :-) Could try to revive the thread with a new patch. --=20 Florent Thoumie flz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD Committer --=-7CmOY925DK8Sg1yeLPjd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBFPi/8MxEkbVFH3PQRAq/fAJwKofNUNJvxFDjc7qVL4lh2E4o3ogCcDaxu Lygtg3LRobEm1SLaJxsJTKk= =IKaO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-7CmOY925DK8Sg1yeLPjd--