svn commit: r303982 - head/www/apache22

Olli Hauer ohauer at
Thu Sep 13 20:12:13 UTC 2012

On 2012-09-13 21:23, Chris Rees wrote:
> On 13 September 2012 02:46, Philip M. Gollucci <pgollucci at> wrote:
>> I don't know about this one.  Why should apache ports specifically point you
>> at the wiki.  The port system as a whole should do this, or every port
>> should (that would be a waste)
>> Please think about this some more.
> Normally I agree, and I think that general solutions are better.
> However, in this case, it's one of those very rare occasions that the
> WITH_ variables don't work correctly.
> The compatibility layer is good, but with something as complex as the
> Apache ports it apparently hasn't passed Olli's tests.

Funny, I miss the original mail ...

There is a regression with the command line parameters which works as follows.

In we have to check if an option is set with this snippet

# OPTIONS handling
.for module in ${AVAILABLE_MODULES}
.       if ${PORT_OPTIONS:M${module}}
_APACHE_MODULES+=       ${module}
.       else
WITHOUT_MODULES+=        ${module}
.       endif

There is no place where we check for WITH/WITHOUT parameters.

If we replace this snippet wit a WITH/WITHOUT check then we fix the
options framework to not remove the line you read with the command
$> tail -n 15 /usr/ports/Mk/

After getting a lot of questions from users how the new options framework
is working and answering for two evenings only this questions I decide
to give all others a starting point so I can work maybe on the 24 port.


More information about the svn-ports-all mailing list