ports include /etc/src.conf? i.e. graphics/libfpx

Mikhail T. mi+thun at aldan.algebra.com
Sat Feb 16 04:09:54 UTC 2013

15.02.2013 19:12, Ian Lepore ???????(??):
> The src.conf manpage is not in error.  The intent is that src.conf
> applies only to the building of the freebsd world and kernel, that is,
> the source that's usually located under /usr/src.  If settings from
> src.conf are leaking into other builds, the error is in the makefiles,
> not in the manpage.  
> Unambiguous evidence of this can be found in the email announcing the
> new src.conf file and why it was created:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2006-March/061725.html
> I'm not an expert with the build system, and that goes double for ports,
> so I can't say exact how or why it's broken, or when the breakage
> happened (or even if it's been broken from the very beginning), but I
> think that announcement email makes it clear the bug isn't the
> documentation.
Thank you, sir, for posting the link. Once I read it, however, I am
puzzled. Because, contrary to what you are saying,it makes no statement
about whether or not knobs in src.conf are (or are not) supposed to
affect makefiles outside of /usr/src. The only paragraph mentioning the
new file says:

    - Options can be passed on the make(1) command line or in the
      new /etc/src.conf (overrideable).  The reason for the new
      src.conf is so we keep make(1) environment clean from these
      variables outside world/kernel builds (make.conf pollutes
      the environment as it's included by sys.mk).

I fail to see, where in the above it says, that a private project's
/home/ian/foo/BSDmakefile is not supposed to be affected by the system's
/etc/src.conf. Do you?

There may be other reasons for src.conf(5) to claim, what it claims
about the file's "only purpose", but the e-mail you referred to is not
one of them.


More information about the freebsd-current mailing list