Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:13:02 +0200 From: Olli Hauer <ohauer@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Question about new options framework (regression?) Message-ID: <5010615E.9060806@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CACdU%2Bf_RW6eWdW9sZsTDfx7bz7L54u5C6qj-e9cBy714WM6KQA@mail.gmail.com> References: <20120725155932.GA13771@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <201207251709.q6PH9mpJ086314@lurza.secnetix.de> <CACdU%2Bf_RW6eWdW9sZsTDfx7bz7L54u5C6qj-e9cBy714WM6KQA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2012-07-25 20:18, Scot Hetzel wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de> wrote:
>>
>> I also tried the other settings you suggested, and none
>> of them works. It's always overridden by the settings
>> that are stored in $PORT_DBDIR.
>>
>> With the old framework, I could override $PORT_DBDIR with
>> "WITH_ZSH_STATIC=true" ... Can't this be done with the
>> new framework, too?
>>
> Reading thru the Mk/bsd.options.mk, it seems you should be able to do:
>
> $ WITH_STATIC=true make showconfig
>
> And it might override the saved settings from the OPTIONSFILE.
No, this will not work.
$ make showconfig | grep STATIC
STATIC=off: Build static executable/libraries
$ make -V LDFLAGS
-L/usr/local/lib -rpath=/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib
$ make -V LDFLAGS WITH_STATIC=true
-L/usr/local/lib -rpath=/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib
Expected result:
-L/usr/local/lib -rpath=/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib -static
Seems we will see more such issues with slave ports since they cannot overwrite the optionsfile (maybe a fake target in the slave with make rmconfig can be a solution ;)
For me this is a regression which was already discussed on this list ( optionsng and tinderbox? )
I also ask with a simple example and got no answers ( options NG and slave/sub ports )
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5010615E.9060806>