Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 00:10:49 -0400 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: Bryan Drewery <bryan@shatow.net> Subject: Re: BUILD_DEPENDS= RUN_DEPENDS= Message-ID: <CAGFTUwOtYvybdD9LkM%2BEK9hyBticMuE-JgJd0JuJFdgvZRBjOA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Hi, > > 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. > > 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. > > This goes along with updating all CLFAGS/LDFLAGS to use += instead of =. > > If there is no objection to this route, I will follow-up with a patch/PR > to update the ports and handbook. Only those user-supplied depends that are added in makefiles included before those lines are parsed (like make.conf) can be affected. But there are a number of other makefiles that exist solely for customizations like you describe -- you mentioned one of them, bsd.local.mk. It is safer and more efficient to move as many of your customizations as possible out of make.conf, and into these other makefiles, as was intended. "+=" was used for a few other variables because these few were often already defined in make.conf for other reasons -- but we are trying to discourage abuse of make.conf, so making a large number of unnecessary changes to make it possible for further additions to make.conf is a bad idea. b.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGFTUwOtYvybdD9LkM%2BEK9hyBticMuE-JgJd0JuJFdgvZRBjOA>