From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 23 19:25:06 2007 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 5970C16A417 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 19:25:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from cp65.agava.net (cp65.agava.net [89.108.66.215]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02D1213C4F8 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 19:25:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from [213.148.20.85] (helo=nexii.panopticon) by cp65.agava.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Ive9J-000MoA-3W; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 22:25:13 +0300 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.2]) by nexii.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D0C317086; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 22:24:55 +0300 (MSK) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F30D340C6; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 22:25:00 +0300 (MSK) Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 22:25:00 +0300 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: Rainer Schwarze Message-ID: <20071123192500.GA37829@hades.panopticon> Mail-Followup-To: Rainer Schwarze , freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org References: <47443BE1.2080308@admadic.de> <20071123012758.GA29752@hades.panopticon> <4746DE95.8070304@admadic.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4746DE95.8070304@admadic.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cp65.agava.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - amdmi3.ru X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Newbie: problem using SUB_LIST in Makefile - SOLVED 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: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 19:25:06 -0000 * Rainer Schwarze (rsc@admadic.de) wrote: > You have the powers of a seer :-) > This is what I was appending to OPTIONS: > CWRAPPER "use C wrapper (no suid perl script needed)" on :)) > > .include > > > > .if !defined(WITHOUT_CWRAPPER) > > Just a newbie question: Is there a reason to use !defined(WITHOUT_...) > instead of defined(WITH_...) ? There was once a rule that you should check for non-default values. I.e. if you have OPTIONS= CWRAPPER "C wrapper" on you should check for WITHOUT_CWRAPPER and if you have OPTIONS= CWRAPPER "C wrapper" off you should check for WITH_CWRAPPER The cause of this is that WITH(OUT)_CWRAPPER may be defined in /etc/make.conf, make environment or make commandline, and that should have higher priority than value set with OPTIONS. For example, you have: OPTIONS= CWRAPPER "C wrapper" on and in /etc/make.conf: WITHOUT_CWRAPPER= yes # I don't want any *** C wrappers!!! Thus, both WITHOUT_CWRAPPER and WITH_CWRAPPER will be defined, but the port will behave correctly if you check for WITHOUT_CWRAPPER. Actually, this was fixed, so you can check for either WITH_ or WITHOUT_ as you like (http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2007-April/039831.html), but I prefer to stick with scheme described above. -- Dmitry A. Marakasov | jabber: amdmi3@jabber.ru amdmi3@amdmi3.ru | http://www.amdmi3.ru