Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 26 Jul 2012 11:56:28 -0500
From:      Jeremy Messenger <mezz.freebsd@gmail.com>
To:        Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com>, Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Jase Thew <jase@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Question about new options framework (regression?)
Message-ID:  <CADLFttesS0_3Mv_J2YL6RaMsFJCH3zrPgz2Lv425XGo=TSAG3g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <501172DD.3080000@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201207261441.q6QEfAY9002147@lurza.secnetix.de> <501172DD.3080000@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 7/26/2012 7:41 AM, Oliver Fromme wrote:
>>
>> Jase Thew wrote:
>>  > On 25/07/2012 23:57, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>  > > 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?
>>  >
>>  > I can't see why it would be of benefit for saved options to override
>>  > anything passed to make (either env or as an arg), as one of the reasons
>>  > you're likely to be passing them is to override any saved settings in
>>  > the first place.
>>  >
>>  > Please consider reverting back to the established and I daresay,
>>  > expected behaviour.
>>
>> I agree with Jase.
>>
>> Actually I'm not sure if PORTS_DBDIR should override make.conf
>> or vice versa.  I don't know which one should be regarded as
>> more specific.
>
> Traditionally the precedence has been:
>
> make.conf < OPTIONS < command line
>
> The reason is that you want to set global options as high up as
> possible, and then be able to override things for specific ports, and
> specific builds.
>
> We were promised that this would work with the new OPTIONS, it's
> disappointing to here that it isn't.

I don't know anything about the promise, but I do agree about that
it's disappoint that make.conf (global options) isn't first.

>> But anything specified on the commandline is definitely more
>> specific than PORTS_DBDIR and should override anything else.
>
> Right.
>
>> One way to do that would be to introduce another pair of
>> variables, e.g. OVERRIDE_SET and OVERRIDE_UNSET, so you could
>> type:  make OVERRIDE_SET=STATIC
>
> That shouldn't be necessary. The code should DTRT, as it did previously.
>
> Doug
>
> --
>
>     Change is hard.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"



-- 
mezz.freebsd@gmail.com - mezz@FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLFttesS0_3Mv_J2YL6RaMsFJCH3zrPgz2Lv425XGo=TSAG3g>