From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 18 21:13:52 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA7C11065678 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:13:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from conrads@cox.net) Received: from eastrmfepo102.cox.net (eastrmfepo102.cox.net [68.230.241.214]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 594D28FC1D for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:13:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastrmimpo02.cox.net ([68.1.16.120]) by eastrmfepo102.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20110918211346.NQWJ12239.eastrmfepo102.cox.net@eastrmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:13:46 -0400 Received: from serene.no-ip.org ([98.164.86.236]) by eastrmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id aMDm1h00D55wwzE02MDmnP; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:13:46 -0400 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020209.4E765F0A.007E,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=WuqbhJSaLsQNgFQdVfTUjneCUYDL0dnDnEJhAdIm7mY= c=1 sm=1 a=vv23vfHO5dAA:10 a=G8Uczd0VNMoA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=uAbGmPAyUfLL1M3oYAsfuA==:17 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=2Rtlml9yQeXSDH1HmlwA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=uAbGmPAyUfLL1M3oYAsfuA==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Authentication-Results: cox.net; none Received: from cox.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by serene.no-ip.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id p8ILDkTD091848 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:13:46 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from conrads@cox.net) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:13:41 -0500 From: "Conrad J. Sabatier" To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20110918161341.306503ab@cox.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Ports with CPPFLAGS in CONFIGURE_(ARGS|ENV) 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: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:13:52 -0000 I did a check yesterday to see how many ports in the tree still have CPPFLAGS defined in either the CONFIGURE_ARGS or CONFIGURE_ENV variable. There are still quite a few, I'm afraid. Anyway, I was wondering how best to go about rectifying this (admittedly minor) problem. I don't want to bombard the pr system with a flurry of individual reports/patches, but I'm not sure I want to pester each and every maintainer about this either. So, what would be a good approach? Any suggestions? -- Conrad J. Sabatier conrads@cox.net