From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 29 21:43:12 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 B4310106564A for ; Mon, 29 Dec 2008 21:43:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from smtp.timeweb.ru (smtp.timeweb.ru [217.170.79.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E64C8FC0C for ; Mon, 29 Dec 2008 21:43:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from [213.148.20.85] (helo=hive.panopticon) by smtp.timeweb.ru with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LHPtF-00084I-AA; Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:43:09 +0300 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.32]) by hive.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A66C044; Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:41:14 +0300 (MSK) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E8D4617032; Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:31:13 +0300 (MSK) Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:31:13 +0300 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: Torfinn Ingolfsen Message-ID: <20081229163113.GA81059@hades.panopticon> References: <20080821105506.GA25154@wep4017.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de> <20080822125845.GB4663@hades.panopticon> <20080822221339.GH1421@hades.panopticon> <20080823020518.GA75067@hades.panopticon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amule 2 port - trying an upgrade 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: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 21:43:14 -0000 * Torfinn Ingolfsen (tingox@gmail.com) wrote: > >> +USE_GETTEXT= yes > > Using gettext conditionally like before no longer work? > I don't really know. What exactly do we gain by using gettext conditionally? Optional NLS support. Less depends, not installing unneeded locales if NLS is not needed. > >> -.if !defined(WITHOUT_OPTIMIZE) > >> +.if defined(WITH_OPTIMIZE) > > No, checking WITHOUT_OPTIMIZE is correct. You should check > > counter-default values for options, i.e. check WITH_FOO if FOO is > > off by default, and WITHOUT_FOO if FOO is on by default. Same for > > other checks. > > Is this documented in the Porters Handbook anywhere? Doesn't look like this. Maybe it should be. -- Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D amdmi3@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amdmi3@jabber.ru http://www.amdmi3.ru