Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 09:57:42 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@FreeBSD.org>, Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/kldxref Makefile Message-ID: <8F70D2AC-029E-4829-A775-600D6AABE69E@xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <20060731163209.GB50797@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <200607302051.k6UKpfNU011188@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060731140951.GC48538@comp.chem.msu.su> <EE87FDC1-709D-4B95-9A74-DFF393796664@xcllnt.net> <20060731163209.GB50797@comp.chem.msu.su>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jul 31, 2006, at 9:32 AM, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 09:10:43AM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 31, 2006, at 7:09 AM, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 08:51:41PM +0000, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>>>> marcel 2006-07-30 20:51:41 UTC
>>>>
>>>> FreeBSD src repository
>>>>
>>>> Modified files:
>>>> usr.sbin/kldxref Makefile
>>>> Log:
>>>> Use NO_SHARED=YES to force a static link.
>>>>
>>>> Pointed out by: ru@
>>>>
>>>> Revision Changes Path
>>>> 1.9 +1 -1 src/usr.sbin/kldxref/Makefile
>>>
>>> Perhaps it should be spelled just ``NO_SHARED='' in keeping with
>>> the current style?
>>
>> I really don't know. Those NO_FOO knobs are not logical in their
>> use.
>>
>>> Unfortunately style.Makefile(5) doesn't seem
>>> to list this rule...
>>
>> Feel free to change my commit to whatever you think is right.
>
> I was sly enough to add Ruslan to Cc in my previous mail :-)
> Let's wait for his opinion on this and below.
Sounds good.
> In the meanwhile I peeked in /usr/share/mk and found that the handling
> of NO_* knobs is quite far from being consistent. For example:
>
> - NO_MAN -- can be just defined ("YES" and "NO" both mean true),
> handled at <bsd.own.mk> level (note that <bsd.own.mk>
> is often included separately now and includes some magic);
>
> - NO_OBJ -- can be just defined to be true, handled in <bsd.obj.mk>,
> which is included from more convenient files like <bsd.prog.mk>;
>
> - NO_SHARED -- must be set to something != "no" for the effect,
> handled in <bsd.prog.mk>.
>
> I'm unsure if there is a reason behind all this diversity.
I doubt there's a reason, because reason would be unreasonable
then :-)
I think the problem is inherent when the existence of the variable
counts and not its value. It's not intuitive and people use it in
different ways because of that. I personally like something simple
like SHARED=NO or SHARED=YES. The lack of definition then meaning
the default setting. This is trivially implemented with SHARED?=YES.
Anyway: that's just me...
--
Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8F70D2AC-029E-4829-A775-600D6AABE69E>