[CLARIFICATION] portupgrade -a

[Daniel S. Haischt]

Yea, I know what you mean. Basically there are some
ports supporting the 'make config' commands.

My current situation is that I did install dozens
of ports which are not supporting the 'make config'
command and unfortunatly I do not remember all the
WITH_BLAH_BLUBBER knobs that I specify while
installing a port.

So there is a great chance that a portupgrade will
install a port with missing knobs :(

Erik Norgaard schrieb:
> Daniel S. Haischt wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>>
>> recently I did update my package tree using the
>> portupgrade command. I was allways in doubt whether
>> my ports will be build with the same WITH_FOO=yes
>> options during an update, as I did built them
>> manually before.
>>
>> After a successfull update of the Gimp, I did
>> notice that the Gimp wasn't built with the ...
>>
>>  WITH_PYTHON=yes
>>
>> ... option. How can I ensure that each of the
>> WITH_XYZ knobs that I did specify during a manual
>> installation of a port, will be recognized during
>> an update as well?
>>
>> Should I, for example, specify those knobs in
>> /etc/make.conf?
>>
> 
> Unfortunately this is not supported by all ports, but some ports opens 
> an interactive menu for enabling/disabling build options and the 
> configuration is then stored in /var/db/ports for future builds. This 
> should replace setting options on the command line.
> 
> AFAIK the idea is that all ports should/will support this in future++. 
> Till then, the above problem will remain :-(
> 
> It's not documented in the porters handbook, but it doesn't seem too 
> difficult to add, but I'm not into the magic. If you have time, create 
> an update of the Makefile and submit to the maintainer. You may take a 
> look at eg. the mplayer-skins port to see how it works.
> 
> Cheers, Erik

-- 
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / With kind regards
Daniel S. Haischt

Wan't a complete signature??? Type at a shell prompt:
$ > finger -l haischt at daniel.stefan.haischt.name