ports.conf: Is there a reason behind not being default?

Dominic Fandrey LoN_Kamikaze at gmx.de
Tue Dec 18 08:16:47 PST 2007

Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:54:05 -0800, Xin LI wrote
>> I think that ports-mgmt/portconf (a.k.a. /usr/local/etc/ports.conf)
>>  is a very handy feature that makes it much easier to store port options
>> across upgrade.  Is there a reason behind not making it into
>> bsd.ports.mk?  IMHO it's a big deal to take the script into
>> ports/Tools/scripts, and move the configuration to somewhere like
>> /etc/ports.conf...
> I haven't checked it out yet. What can it do that can't be done in
> /etc/make.conf with constructs like
> .if ${.CURDIR} == "/usr/ports/editors/vim"
> WITH_GTK2=yes
> .endif
> ?

Actually it can only do less than that (and it won't work if /usr/ports is a
symlink, at least the last time I checked). The only advantage is a more
compact (and simple) syntax.

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list