Gerald Pfeifer gerald at
Sun Feb 14 22:42:23 UTC 2010

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010, b. f. wrote:
> I agree with you, and I meant to mention this to gerald@ earlier, but
> I forgot.  The Ports system is not now well-equipped to deal with
> LOCALBASE != PREFIX for a lot of software, and most people don't do
> this, so the impact is limited, but it does break some test builds and
> utilities, as you have seen.

Thanks for forwarding this report my way b.  I agree, based on personal
experience, that in general once one uses some of the flexibility the
Ports Collection provides deviating from the defaults, things tend to
become interesting, but still we should address issues when we encounter
them to the extent possible.

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010, Rob Farmer wrote:
> Yeah, I realize this is kind of an unusual situation and I understand
> that with the ports freeze coming up that now is not a good time to be
> making these kind of changes, but just thought I would mention it
> since I came across it.

Well, one can reasonably call this a bug -- after all, you ran into a
very concrete problem -- and for default settings PREFIX and LOCALBASE
are the same, so the risk of the change is very low and I went ahead
and committed a patch.

Thanks for reporting this, Rob, and I'm sorry you ran into this.

Gerald (Jerry) Pfeifer   gerald at

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list