From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 30 06:46:48 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 486BCE15 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 06:46:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gw.catspoiler.org (cl-1657.chi-02.us.sixxs.net [IPv6:2001:4978:f:678::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9F45A84 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 06:46:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from FreeBSD.org (mousie.catspoiler.org [192.168.101.2]) by gw.catspoiler.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id t0U6kW1L009003; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 22:46:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <201501300646.t0U6kW1L009003@gw.catspoiler.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 22:46:32 -0800 (PST) From: Don Lewis Subject: Re: testing the value of ${CXX} in ports Makefile To: bsd-lists@bsdforge.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 06:46:48 -0000 On 29 Jan, Chris H wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 19:43:38 -0800 (PST) Don Lewis wrote > >> I need to test the value of ${CXX} in the Makefile for a port and am >> getting unexpected results. Here is a simplified version of the >> Makefile: >> >> PORTNAME= junk >> PORTVERSION= 0.0.0 >> CATEGORIES= devel >> DISTFILES= >> >> MAINTAINER= truckman@FreeBSD.org >> COMMENT= junk >> >> USE_GCC= 4.9+ >> >> .include >> >> post-patch: >> echo CXX=${CXX} >> .if ${CXX} == g++49 >> echo detected g++49 >> .else >> echo did not detect g++49 >> .endif >> >> .include >> >> >> If I run "make patch", this is what I get: >> >> # make patch >> ===> junk-0.0.0 depends on file: /usr/local/sbin/pkg - found >> ===> Fetching all distfiles required by junk-0.0.0 for building >> ===> Extracting for junk-0.0.0 >> ===> Patching for junk-0.0.0 >> echo CXX=g++49 >> CXX=g++49 >> echo did not detect g++49 >> did not detect g++49 >> >> >> If I run "make -dA patch" and look at the debug output, I observe >> bsd.gcc.mk getting processed after the .if is evaluated. When the .if >> is processed, the value of ${CXX} is still c++. It sort of looks like >> bsd.gcc.mk isn't getting included until bsd.port.post.mk and we are >> relying on lazy expansion to get the correct value of ${CXX} for the >> actions. >> >> It sort of looks like I'll have to do something like: >> >> post-patch: >> [ ${CXX} = g++49 ] && echo detected g++49 >> >> but that just seems goofy. > I'm not attempting to come off as any sot of expert. But it > seems like you're going the long way around. Couldn't you > just as easily REQUIRE, or perhaps even better; simply reverse > the logic; > > if ${CXX} != g++49 > @VOMIT > endif > > It'd be shorter, and still assures the results you require, > no? Just a thought. gcc46, gcc47, gcc48, and probably gcc5 (haven't tested that one yet) all work. gcc49 requires a source patch. I just want to be able to set USE_GCC=yes and not have the port break when the default version of gcc gets changed to 4.9. The way that the ports infrastructure is written, it looks like I can't do the test with a Makefile .if / .endif. It looks like I have to do it in the shell code in actions for the target. Instead of using [ condition ] && do something, I could also write it as if [ ${CXX} = g++49 ]; then apply the patch; fi