Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 00:52:05 +0200 From: Mel Flynn <rflynn@acsalaska.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: optionsng ignores /var/db/ports/<portname>/options Message-ID: <4FCBEA95.6050807@acsalaska.net> In-Reply-To: <4FCBE328.3030702@FreeBSD.org> References: <20120603192023.GA8350@slackbox.erewhon.net> <20120603200101.GB98939@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20120603215406.GC98939@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <4FCBE328.3030702@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4-6-2012 0:20, Michael Scheidell wrote: > optionsng should have been 100% upward compatible. you should not be > forced to an an emergency update of a port you maintain just because the > ports tree broke things. This has always been broken. It's just exposed by Roland cause he's /adding/ an option and never had any. graphics/py-yaml has the work around and it's been there since version 1.14: <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/devel/py-yaml/Makefile?annotate=1.20>; (line 25) The real issue is that something created for slave ports (thus set before any of the option framework comes in play) is "abused" by Mk/ frameworks that only come in sight /after/ options.mk. This causes two versions of UNIQUENAME in the execution stream to exist. One before the framework is included and one after. -- Mel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FCBEA95.6050807>