Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 00:17:40 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Dmitry Pryanishnikov <dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua> Cc: freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: 5.5 to 6.1 upgrade Message-ID: <44F29894.9040700@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060827193347.J1751@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1060823010930.9072A-100000@gaia.nimnet.asn.au> <5B7BD83A-6316-4C20-903E-B5D66D4F2642@khera.org> <44EB5354.6070007@paladin.bulgarpress.com> <F55D8A99-A30E-49DB-94F3-8A1737CF7556@khera.org> <44EB6411.4040406@paladin.bulgarpress.com> <20060823193309.GA77890@rambler-co.ru> <44ECBFE8.7000809@FreeBSD.org> <20060824082012.GA81296@rambler-co.ru> <20060827002203.A39026@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <44F130B2.8010702@FreeBSD.org> <20060827193347.J1751@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
> Hmm, let me cite your letter in this thread:
This isn't a court of law. :)
> sysutils/portconf does not have that limitation. If you specify flags using
> that method, they will always be used.
>
> FYI,
>
> Doug
> =========================================================================
>
> So, one can mistakenly think that "always" here really means ALWAYS
> (i.e., for every port). However many ports use that funny OPTIONS (in
> the ports sense) which completely ignore make's WITH_xxx / WITHOUT_xxx
> environment variables, so "always" isn't correct word here I suppose.
I probably should have said, "will always work like a a variable in
make.conf would." If I caused confusion, I apologize.
As for the other things you mentioned, I'm sure that the respective authors
would welcome patches to correct the shortcomings you perceive.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44F29894.9040700>