Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 25 Aug 2012 17:18:17 -0400
From:      Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com>
To:        Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Dirk Meyer <dinoex@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, curtis@occnc.com
Subject:   Re: patch to build spamass-milter with sendmail-sasl
Message-ID:  <201208252118.q7PLIHe4011678@gateway2.orleans.occnc.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 25 Aug 2012 21:46:48 BST." <CADLo83_xKKC4oEJQ1ti1aQR5gq2DadeUh-7VvatQ=5skQR6UtA@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

In message <CADLo83_xKKC4oEJQ1ti1aQR5gq2DadeUh-7VvatQ=5skQR6UtA@mail.gmail.com>
Chris Rees writes:
 
> On 25 August 2012 21:38, Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com> wrote:
> >
> > In message <CADLo839FeQroEt6r12+KgWgoUuj1gcNkanm-hqHVQSC2g8k-Ug@mail.gmail.com>
> > Chris Rees writes:
> >
> >> On 23 August 2012 21:37, Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng. <lkchen@ksu.edu> wrote:
> >> > Just the patch I was looking for.
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> >>
> >> >> FYI-
> >> >>
> >> >> The mail/spamass-milter port won't build if the sendmail-sasl port
> >> >> has
> >> >> been built.  The patch below fixes this.
> >> >>
> >> >> The port maintainer is on the Cc.  No bug has been reported.
> >>
> >> Thanks for your patch Curtis; I've used it as a base for some further
> >> tweaks, and sent a PR [1].
> >>
> >> Unfortunately you hadn't CC'd the correct maintainer, but this is not
> >> a problem since the PR will email him for us.
> >>
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=170943
> >
> >
> > There may be a better way to fix this - eliminate the need for the
> > sendmail-sasl and sendmail-ldap ports by using the options framework
> > in the sendmail port.  I used this diff to do that in a later build.
> > (the first was amd64, the second i386).
> >
> > Curtis
> >
> >
> > The following patch is to the Makefile in {/usr/ports/}mail/sendmail
> > and only makes use of the port options framework to set options rather
> > than having users either type them on the command line, or edit the
> > makefile, or use pseudo ports like sendmail-sasl and sendmail-ldap to
> > set a specific option.  The sendmail-sasl and sendmail-ldap should be
> > marked as depricated in their makefiles.
> >
>  
> [previous patch trimmed; can be found at [1]]
>  
> Ah... the use of slave ports (like -sasl) is to create handy packages
> for those who use packages, as well as meaning that people can put
> dependencies on certain OPTIONS.
>  
> Also, your code could be a little more brief;
>  
> # convert OPTIONS in WITH_* form to SENDMAIL_WITH_*
> .if defined(WITH_IPV6)
> SENDMAIL_WITH_IPV6=yes
> .else
> SENDMAIL_WITHOUT_IPV6=yes
> .endif
>  
> should be using OPTIONSng, and a for loop:
>  
> .for o in ${PORT_OPTIONS}
> .if ${PORT_OPTIONS:M$o}
> SENDMAIL_WITH_$o=yes
> .else
> SENDMAIL_WITHOUT_$o=yes
> .endif
>  
> To be honest, it's not really good enough to be hacking the Makefile
> like this; if you would like to try a conversion to new-style OPTIONS
> I would recommend reading [2], but before you put yourself through
> this CHECK WITH THE MAINTAINER (CC'd) that such a patch would be
> accepted!
>  
> I'm willing to help off-list if Dirk will accept a patch.
>  
> Chris
>  
> [1] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2012-August/077775.html
>  
> [2] http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-options.html#AEN2638


Chris,

Thanks.  I'll create an OPTIONSng patch for the mail/sendmail Makefile
and send it and just hope it gets accepted.  If not, I'll keep it as a
local patch.  Its not much work.

Curtis



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201208252118.q7PLIHe4011678>