Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 18:32:42 -0500 From: Bryan Drewery <bryan@shatow.net> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BUILD_DEPENDS= RUN_DEPENDS= Message-ID: <4FB1961A.4000405@shatow.net> In-Reply-To: <E93121AF-8FAD-4848-B3D7-5CC27DC1210E@mac.com> References: <4FB1919E.3060700@shatow.net> <E93121AF-8FAD-4848-B3D7-5CC27DC1210E@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/14/2012 06:25 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote: > On May 14, 2012, at 4:13 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> I was trying to append to these in my /etc/make.conf and found that a >> large (thousands) number of ports are using = instead of +=, thus >> destroying any user-supplied depends. > > Yes. I think this may even be intentional on the part of the various > port maintainers, but the notion of user-supplied additional dependencies > is interesting. :-) Yes I have that concern as well. The risk may far outweigh the benefits here. > >> The use case for wanting to do this is to force devel/ccache to be a >> build dependency on all ports, for package building. Or to force in a >> particular library along with LDFLAGS into particular ports. This is >> achievable by modifying bsd.local.mk, but is not ideal. > > Why do you need ccache added to the build dependencies to use it? > Can't you just change CC/C++? For package building. I'm using a package building script that removes all packages before building the next, then only installs the build depends before building the next. Modifying CC is separate - need ccache installed first. Of course, I could update the package building tool to just install ccache first, which I will likely do anyway. It's just 1 example. Off the top of my head I can not think of other specific cases. Thanks for the input, Bryan Drewery
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FB1961A.4000405>