devel/pcre and WITH_UTF8

Michael C. Shultz ringworm01 at
Mon Feb 21 08:35:09 PST 2005

On Monday 21 February 2005 08:16 am, Marwan Burelle wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 04:58:32PM +0100, Simon Barner wrote:
> > We probably need a mechanism to require compile time options via
> > the dependency mechanism.
> >
> > The following idea just popped into my mind (probably most
> > applicable to OPTIONs):
> >  - encode the set of chosen options into the package name
> >  - enhance the dependency tracking algorithm to accept the
> > installed version of a port if and only if the set of installed
> > options is a super-set of the set of requested options.
> >
> > Admittedly, this might result in lengthy package names (but that's
> > the same if popular combination of options are encoded as slave
> > ports).
> Hum, this can break the DEPEND mechanism, actualy it used the
> existance of the desired lib/binary and refer to port/package only if
> it's not here, so you can satisfy a depency wihtout using ports
> ... (I'm not sure if it wanted, but it could be usefull ;)
> For the port I'm talking about, I can think of a way to test if pcre
> has UTF8 support, but not on how to force reinstall.

This seems like a good solution on its own. Just do the test you 
described, if it fails print a message that says pcre needs to be built 
with WITH_UTF8=yes or however that port sets its options. No need
to modify the ports system.


> By the way, would it be simpler to record the build option in
> /var/db/pkg ? In fact, ports using "make config" already record
> option in /var/db/ports, generalizing this for non-interactive ports
> could be a good starting point.

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list