HEADS UP: New bsd.*.mk changes
eivind at FreeBSD.org
Tue Jan 20 05:30:21 PST 2004
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 02:12:25PM +0100, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
> Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> >Type: FEATURE
> >Title: Add per-port persistent build options with a menu-driven
> >Affects: bsd.port.mk
> >Description: Probably one of the most anticipated new features for the
> >ports system is the ability to have persistent per-port build options.
> >This new feature adds that functionality as well as a new menu-driven
> >interface for setting those per-port options. Porters will need to set
> >the OPTIONS macro in their port's Makefile to a list of WITH_ options
> >supported by that port. The format is <option> "<description>"
> >[on|off]. For example: FLEXRESP "Flexible response to events" off.
> >This says that this port supports a WITH_FLEXRESP option that is not
> >defined by default. This option's description is, "Flexible response
> >to events." Multiple options should be chained into the one OPTIONS
> >macro. NOTE: For OPTIONS to work, you must define OPTIONS before
> >bsd.port.pre.mk. In order to configure these options, use the
> >``config'' target. Doing ``make config'' will pop up a curses-based
> >dialog which lists all the available options for the given port.
> >Changes are saved in a per-port directory under PORTS_DBDIR (default:
> >/var/db/ports). To view configurable options for a port, use the
> >``showconfig'' target. To set all port options back to the defaults,
> >use the ``rmconfig'' target.
> >Submitted by: eivind
> Sorry for stepping up so late, but this saves options under
> Lots of ports have the same PORTNAME (ie 'openldap' for
> net/openldap2-(client|server), 'apache' for russian/apache13,
> www/apache(13|13-fp|2|21)). Some conflict, but -client/-server don't.
> Either each port has to set OPTIONSFILE to
> or we may use LATEST_LINK instead of PORTNAME:
I can't have any particularly reasoned opinion either way - the use
of PORTNAME is inherited from kris, who replaced storing in a file
in the port source directory with the use of PORTNAME (IMO, a large
improvement). And I thought it was supposed to be unique, while it seems
it isn't. That said, I think the name LATEST_LINK should be changed (possibly
not right now) if LATEST_LINK is to be used this way.
Also, I don't see why LATEST_LINK would always be unique - instead, it looks to
me as if there could be conflicts between different ports on this (while I thought
we defined that there shouldn't be for PORTNAME).
More information about the freebsd-ports