From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 26 04:55:58 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2E59106566B; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 04:55:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76E588FC0A; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 04:55:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6Q4twnt047713; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 04:55:58 GMT (envelope-from bapt@freebsd.org) Received: (from bapt@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q6Q4twK9047712; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 04:55:58 GMT (envelope-from bapt@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: bapt set sender to bapt@freebsd.org using -f Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 04:55:55 +0000 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Eitan Adler Message-ID: <20120726045555.GE13771@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <20120725155932.GA13771@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <201207251709.q6PH9mpJ086314@lurza.secnetix.de> <5010640B.6070107@FreeBSD.org> <20120725225736.GD13771@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="r7U+bLA8boMOj+mD" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: FreeBSD Ports , Scot Hetzel , Oliver Fromme , freebsd-ports Subject: Re: Question about new options framework (regression?) 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, 26 Jul 2012 04:55:58 -0000 --r7U+bLA8boMOj+mD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 07:40:56PM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 25 July 2012 15:57, Baptiste Daroussin 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 wrote: > >> > >> The following diff will restore the old behavior so make.conf and comm= and 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 i= s the > > options file. > > > > if most people want the options file to not have the final priority, wh= y not, > > can others spread their opinion here? >=20 > An option specified on the command line is more specific and should > have priority over saved values or configuration files. >=20 > --=20 > Eitan Adler You can already do that: OPTIONSFILE=3D/my/path/to/options make config regards, Bapt --r7U+bLA8boMOj+mD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlAQzdsACgkQ8kTtMUmk6Eyw3ACeJKgUV6yVxMSUdEYG3ycV3w7z XrIAn3d9n8zPd4vXQKuo5bYMzKv/1db6 =VG90 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --r7U+bLA8boMOj+mD--