Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Feb 2024 09:09:19 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        java@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 277204] *: ports misusing WITH_CCACHE_BUILD and NO_CCACHE
Message-ID:  <bug-277204-8522-R7Da2r1LtC@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-277204-8522@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-277204-8522@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D277204

--- Comment #4 from Benjamin Takacs <nimaje+fbz@bureaucracy.de> ---
(In reply to Gleb Popov from comment #2)
As features are still loaded in the post section of bsd.port.mk, I don't see
how it would help these ports to detect if ccache support is enabled. By
allowing them  to read WITH_CCACHE and making only setting WITH_CCACHE with=
out
setting CCACHE_DIR a hard error instead of a warning? And if I read bsd.por=
t.mk
right there still could be cases when WITH_CCACHE and WITHOUT_CCACHE are se=
t,
when the user sets WITH_CCACHE=3Dyes WITHOUT_CCACHE_PORTS=3D"someport". So =
ports
wanting to detect if ccache is enabled would have to use  .if
defined(WITH_CCACHE) && !defined(WITHOUT_CCACHE)  after WITH{,OUT}_<feature>
and WITH_<feature>_PORTS is processed in the options section.

Additionally bsd.ccache.mk reads the undocumented variable NOCCACHE (and se=
ts
NO_CCACHE=3Dt if it was set); still sets CCACHE_ENABLED=3Dyes if WITH_CCACH=
E_BUILD
and NO_CCACHE are set (but no port that disables ccache via NO_CCACHE should
try to detect ccache support, so that's just a minor correctness issue); se=
ts
NO_CCACHE in some cases.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-277204-8522-R7Da2r1LtC>