Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 08:57:46 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Matthew Hunt <mph@pobox.com> Cc: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@futuresouth.com>, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: make.conf Message-ID: <1018.904492666@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 30 Aug 1998 09:18:21 EDT." <19980830091821.A4934@flarn.dyn.ml.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I didn't want to join this conversation, but it has an odd gravitational attraction - even if you know it's going to suck you in and squish you flat, you just gotta go there for some reason. :-) If /etc/make.conf is split at all then it should be split into: /usr/src/conf.mk - configuration frobs exclusively for /usr/src /usr/ports/conf.mk - configuration frobs exclusively for /usr/ports. /usr/share/mk/conf.mk - stuff truly global to any invocation of Bmake e.g. variables you want both src and ports (and so on) to get as a base set before potentially laying their own on top. And yes, conf.mk rather than make.conf; the latter name was ill-chosen since it made people think that it was some sort of rc.conf type of parameter store rather than something actually sucked straight into make and subject to make's rule for conditionals, variable expansion, etc. But that's just MHO. :) - Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1018.904492666>