Question about new options framework (regression?)

[Olli Hauer]

On 2012-07-26 06:55, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 07:40:56PM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote:
>> On 25 July 2012 15:57, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:24:27PM +0200, Olli Hauer wrote:
>>>> On 2012-07-25 20:18, Scot Hetzel wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Oliver Fromme <olli at lurza.secnetix.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The following diff will restore the old behavior so make.conf and command params have priority.
>>>> (Place the make.conf part after the OPTIONS_FILE_SET part)
>>>>
>>>> Until now I cannot see why the OPTIONS file should always win.
>>>>
>>>
>>> because the priority goes to global to specific and the most specific is the
>>> options file.
>>>
>>> if most people want the options file to not have the final priority, why not,
>>> can others spread their opinion here?
>>
>> An option specified on the command line is more specific and should
>> have priority over saved values or configuration files.
>>
>> -- 
>> Eitan Adler
> 
> You can already do that:
> OPTIONSFILE=/my/path/to/options make config
> 

Are you kidding?

> because the priority goes to global to specific and the most specific is the options file.

I suspect no one wants to maintain different option files.
As shown options file is not the most specific one, it's the command arg.