odhiambo at gmail.com
Sun Sep 16 09:38:35 UTC 2012
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Chris Rees <crees at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 16 September 2012 10:20, Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo at gmail.com>
> > On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Chris Rees <crees at freebsd.org> wrote:
> >> On 16 September 2012 09:32, Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Chris,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for this.
> >> >
> >> > Hopefully, you can modify the Wiki to have this information and even
> >> > examples:)
> >> There are examples on the Wiki page already, but in a confusing order.
> >> I've put in a link, and a tip on how to find UNIQUENAME.
> >> > Personally, I use `make config` and have never needed to do much with
> >> > /etc/make.conf as regards the ports.
> >> True, but some people like to share their make.conf around machines :)
> >> Chris
> > My machines are all identical too, except for parameters related to
> > $hostname, DNS and passwords.
> > I mostly used /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf before, then `make config` and
> > now I believe I am gonna switch to /etc/make.conf but only where I must
> > finely customize.
> > One thing has crossed my mind now: What happens with make -DWITH_* in
> > new development of optionsNG?? I have manually built ports that way
> > And what about those who want to use portinstall -m WITH_OPTx=1
> > etc?
> Still works fine for nearly all ports, but just for apache ports there
> appears to be subtle problems with the logic since it's so
> complicated. That's why Olli chose to disable the WITH_ option style
> for Apache, and I think it was the right decision.
> I would suggest you learn the new (just as simple) syntax and see how
> you get on with it :)
I was thinking this optionsNG has already been adopted for all ports.
Thanks for the examples though. They are good enough for me to learn the
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler.
More information about the freebsd-questions