Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 Jul 2010 12:46:57 -0400
From:      Greg Larkin <glarkin@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Jim Pazarena <fports@paz.bz>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: dspam install
Message-ID:  <4C3DEA01.9040806@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C3DDF33.4030706@paz.bz>
References:  <4C3A2EE7.7020104@paz.bz>	<20100711212831.GA17226@magic.hamla.org>	<AANLkTikNzfsunMHILOG6oUgJqPQLu9AZQWX0t50HxxRH@mail.gmail.com>	<20100712230428.GB18432@magic.hamla.org>	<AANLkTikSxrIkpzB-cFiGCwOrggv6-4qp-vgIw08HIIQa@mail.gmail.com>	<20100713222839.GA19319@magic.hamla.org> <4C3DDF33.4030706@paz.bz>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Pazarena wrote:
> Sahil Tandon wrote:
>> [mail/dspam maintainer Cc:'d]
>>
>> On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 09:46:04 +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
>>
>>> 2010/7/13 Sahil Tandon <sahil@freebsd.org>:
>>>> On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 21:28:56 +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
>>> Yes sometime I'm nasty with people, I'm sorry about that but when I
>>> saw this port I just didn't understand.
>>
>> What did you not understand?
>>
>>> I apologize for my english.
>>
>> No apology needed, as that is not the problem here.
> 
> my own ports confusion (in general) is that in some ports
> you use a "-Dxxxxxx" to define a required (or not required) option
> while in others (at least dspam) you use WITHOUT_xxx or WITH_xxx=1.
> It would be nice if all ports has the same standard of definitions.
> 
> Or... am I confused?

I don't know of any ports that use -Dxxx to specify options at the port
level.  If the port Makefile uses an "OPTIONS=" variable, then it will
use WITH_xxx and WITHOUT_xxx to check the option values.  You can also
use WITH_xxx and WITHOUT_xxx checks without defining OPTIONS.

It's possible that a port Makefile could do something like this:

.if defined(WITH_FOOBAR)
CFLAGS+=	-DHAVE_FOOBAR_H
.endif

In this case, the -Dxxx option is specific to the application
configuration and/or build system, but not part of the ports infrastructure.

Hope that helps,
Greg
- --
Greg Larkin

http://www.FreeBSD.org/           - The Power To Serve
http://www.sourcehosting.net/     - Ready. Set. Code.
http://twitter.com/sourcehosting/ - Follow me, follow you
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iD8DBQFMPeoB0sRouByUApARAib8AKCxHFtzNdvWmptZRiyjTY/BD39nNQCgpgnB
hbE7yT1lBq5OrbwIgaCifYA=
=uIbz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C3DEA01.9040806>