Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:46:40 +0700 From: Victor Sudakov <sudakov@sibptus.tomsk.ru> To: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: the samba 2.2.11 port and popt Message-ID: <20040826094640.GA58773@sibptus.tomsk.ru> In-Reply-To: <82FECF58-F73D-11D8-91E7-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> References: <20040826075528.GA56661@sibptus.tomsk.ru> <82FECF58-F73D-11D8-91E7-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--3MwIy2ne0vdjdPXF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oliver Eikemeier wrote: >=20 > >The dependency on ports/devel/popt brings a real dependency hell: > >popt depends on gettext which depends on expat etc etc. > >Many people do not desire this. >=20 > That's what `WITHOUT_NLS=3Dyes' is for. When you don't use this option=20 This option is always in my /etc/make.conf. The problem is that the samba port (to be more exact, the ports/devel/popt port) does not honor the WITHOUT_NLS option. > some other port will pull in gettext anyway. Up to this moment, I have managed to do without gettext :) Some ports support WITHOUT_NLS, some (like samba) require slight hacking to get rid of gettext. I tried to teach ports/devel/popt to honor WITHOUT_NLS, it was not successful, so I decided to teach the samba port to use the internal popt in which I succeeded. Why do you need the external popt in samba anyway? --=20 Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN --3MwIy2ne0vdjdPXF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBLbGAFcuVuXBn0+gRAnyrAJ9/xkAfZem5Z1CtV7xUR92K8WgzqACfTxV9 asIoufMfi0Y+cEK2XaftdEA= =923T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3MwIy2ne0vdjdPXF--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040826094640.GA58773>