Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:21:00 +0200 From: Kimmo Paasiala <kpaasial@gmail.com> To: Olli Hauer <ohauer@freebsd.org> Cc: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Dewayne Geraghty <dewayne.geraghty@heuristicsystems.com.au> Subject: Re: Problems with devel/apr1 or options_group Message-ID: <CA%2B7WWSc3LtHNSm1K8rgaRx=%2B2Aquv3r5dMw_aGZfXPb8BJ1OgQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <50DC53C9.7020506@FreeBSD.org> References: <1TncE1-0005yN-0m@internal.tormail.org> <87r4mdzoog.wl%hskuhra@eumx.net> <826924ADF5944105BFBC01D6A4AA41A8@black> <50DC53C9.7020506@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Olli Hauer <ohauer@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 2012-12-27 09:38, Dewayne Geraghty wrote:
>> While trying to build apache22 with ldap, the dependency apr1 passes a "--without-ldap" flag to apr-util which results in apache
>> failing.
>>
>> * Background *
>> Some 450+ packages are built on a 4 monthly cycle, 149 of these are controlled by ports.conf and built using portmaster. This is the
>> second time since 2005 that I've been stuck and would appreciate some advice/guidance whether the problem lies with something in apr
>> that I am missing, or the use of ${UNIQUENAME}_SET doesn't work with new OPTIONS_GROUP?
>>
>> We used a script to modify our ports.conf to accommodate the new optionng _SET and _UNSET which worked nicely last time ports were
>> built.
>>
>> These are the relevant options from ports.conf
>> devel/apr1: WITH_THREADS | WITH_BDB | WITH_LDAP | WITHOUT_GDBM | APR1_UNSET=GDBM | APR1_SET=THREADS BDB LDAP
> [...]
>
> I suspect here is the mistake
> $> cd devel/apr1
> $> make -V UNIQUENAME
> apr (-> not apr1)
>
> I don't work with portmaster (happy tinderbox user ;).
> Can you try the following line in your ports.conf
>
> file ports.conf: devel/apr1: WITH_THREADS | WITH_BDB | WITH_LDAP | WITHOUT_GDBM | APR_UNSET=GDBM | APR_SET=THREADS BDB LDAP
>
> --
> Regards,
> olli
Is there any particular reason why the UNIQUENAME couldn't just be the
name of the port in all cases? I would make writing the options in
optionsng format lot easier.
-Kimmo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2B7WWSc3LtHNSm1K8rgaRx=%2B2Aquv3r5dMw_aGZfXPb8BJ1OgQ>