Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:22:43 +0000 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Jase Thew <jase@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: <20120727162242.GA48384@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <5012B7CF.9020002@FreeBSD.org> References: <501151A8.7000901@FreeBSD.org> <201207261441.q6QEfAY9002147@lurza.secnetix.de> <20120727094158.GC29866@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <5012B7CF.9020002@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 04:46:23PM +0100, Jase Thew wrote: > On 27/07/2012 10:41, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 04:41:10PM +0200, 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 spec= ific is the > >> > > options file. > >> > >=20 > >> > > if most people want the options file to not have the final priori= ty, why not, > >> > > can others spread their opinion here? > >> >=20 > >> > 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 re= asons > >> > you're likely to be passing them is to override any saved settings = in > >> > the first place. > >> >=20 > >> > 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. > >> > >> But anything specified on the commandline is definitely more > >> specific than PORTS_DBDIR and should override anything else. > >> > >> 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=3DSTATIC > >> > >=20 > > I think that is the more reasonnable, I'll add this when fully back. I = was > > thinking of LATE_SET and LATE_UNSET but OVERRIDE_SET and OVERRIDE_UNSET= sounds > > better to me. > >=20 >=20 > What use-case are you thinking of that requires the ability for saved > config to override manually specified config? If there isn't a > compelling reason for this, then I'd personally much rather see the > original behaviour restored rather than adding another two variables. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Jase. > --=20 > Jase Thew > jase@FreeBSD.org > FreeBSD Ports Committer >=20 >=20 The use-case is the one which is the start of this thread. Olivier has a sa= ve configuration of zsh and want in one shot be able to activate the STATIC op= tion which is not activate in his normal zsh. regards, Bapt --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlASwFIACgkQ8kTtMUmk6Ey9oACbB73xs1ykJX4j3K7x8MYjgqdI xAgAn1iGZHFa/AqeO6ZhaQQSnucj6mse =V1Ig -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120727162242.GA48384>