Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 19:40:56 -0700 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org>, Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com>, Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de>, freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Question about new options framework (regression?) Message-ID: <CAF6rxgkYZAMWnNXLEL7ye1A%2Bo_JWs%2B%2BRPRDBjMnLMiDte_Ag1g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120725225736.GD13771@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <20120725155932.GA13771@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <201207251709.q6PH9mpJ086314@lurza.secnetix.de> <CACdU%2Bf_RW6eWdW9sZsTDfx7bz7L54u5C6qj-e9cBy714WM6KQA@mail.gmail.com> <5010640B.6070107@FreeBSD.org> <20120725225736.GD13771@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 25 July 2012 15:57, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:24:27PM +0200, Olli Hauer wrote: >> 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: >> >> The following diff will restore the old behavior so make.conf and command params have priority. >> (Place the make.conf part after the OPTIONS_FILE_SET part) >> >> Until now I cannot see why the OPTIONS file should always win. >> > > because the priority goes to global to specific and the most specific is the > options file. > > if most people want the options file to not have the final priority, why not, > can others spread their opinion here? An option specified on the command line is more specific and should have priority over saved values or configuration files. -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgkYZAMWnNXLEL7ye1A%2Bo_JWs%2B%2BRPRDBjMnLMiDte_Ag1g>