Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 17:53:51 +0100 From: alex@cichlids.cichlids.com (Alexander Langer) To: Mikhail Teterin <mi@misha.privatelabs.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, billf@freebsd.org, knu@freebsd.org, ve@sci.fi Subject: Re: WITH_X11 vs. NO_X Message-ID: <20010323175351.A2279@cichlids.cichlids.com> In-Reply-To: <200103212041.f2LKfB161374@misha.privatelabs.com>; from mi@misha.privatelabs.com on Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 03:41:10PM -0500 References: <200103212041.f2LKfB161374@misha.privatelabs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake Mikhail Teterin (mi@misha.privatelabs.com): > .ifndef NO_X > WITH_X11= YES > .endif > or the other way around? No. NO_X forbids use of X while WITH_X11 enables it explicitely. There still is a "I just don't care" case. Alex -- cat: /home/alex/.sig: No such file or directory To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010323175351.A2279>