From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 13 19:42:51 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1665F16A403; Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:42:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (out1.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACAEE43D46; Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:42:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from frontend2.internal (frontend2.internal [10.202.2.151]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A10D47F24; Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:42:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend3.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.152]) by frontend2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:42:26 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: knBASdHA3YxGwUGHBrn0ejPmSW9nWd3A9DG7aIia+Gbt 1144957345 Received: from bb-87-81-140-128.ukonline.co.uk (bb-87-81-140-128.ukonline.co.uk [87.81.140.128]) by frontend3.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EEAA71F3; Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:42:25 -0400 (EDT) From: RW To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 20:42:44 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <12B35022-89C3-4A5B-ACE3-1C3145974AF9@brooknet.com.au> <200604122223.43721.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> <97FBD368-1075-4A9C-9339-8C3524E09DA9@brooknet.com.au> In-Reply-To: <97FBD368-1075-4A9C-9339-8C3524E09DA9@brooknet.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200604132042.47188.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> Cc: dougb@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What does BATCH=yes really mean? (portmaster vs. bpm) 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: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:42:51 -0000 On Thursday 13 April 2006 09:57, Sam Lawrance wrote: > On 13/04/2006, at 7:23 AM, RW wrote: > > BATCH is an instuction not to build ports with IS_INTERACTIVE set - > > typically > > ports with legal conditions that need to be agreed to. > > > > It's also used as a hint to build without asking for configuration > > options. > > This secondary meaning makes no sense with "make config". It seems > > to me the > > ports system is behaving correctly and portmaster is doing > > something odd. > > I'm not so sure about that. I would have expected it to select the > default set of options, just as it would if you were building with > BATCH set. As I understand it, "make config" would then just do nothing when BATCH is set. As it stands, someone with BATCH set in a configuration file can still run "make config" to set options. IMO that's the way it should be since it's an explicit request, rather than a side-effect. I think it would make sense for portmaster to check for BATCH itself.