From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Aug 30 0:58:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from ipcard.iptcom.net (ipcard.iptcom.net [212.9.224.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CADC37B403; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:57:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from vega.vega.com (dialup6-40.iptelecom.net.ua [212.9.227.104]) by ipcard.iptcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA04774; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:57:54 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (big_brother.vega.com [192.168.1.1]) by vega.vega.com (8.11.4/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7U7vNo65547; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:57:23 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <3B8DF22B.135E063B@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:58:35 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Vega International Capital X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,uk,ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: obrien@FreeBSD.org Cc: Alexander Langer , arch@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports.conf References: <20010828221018.A31427@zerogravity.kawo2.rwth-aachen.d> <3B8CDC38.EC1EE32C@FreeBSD.org> <20010830005148.A7371@dragon.nuxi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org David O'Brien wrote: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 03:12:40PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > Ok, now I've read the thread and can give my comments on the topic. To me > > it seems that ports.conf file isn't really necessary, because it would be > > just another file that gets unconditionally included from the bsd.ports.mk, > > perhaps we could just merge content of hypotetic ports.conf with > > bsd.ports.mk instead. > > You weren't paying attention where I mentioned that across my various > FreeBSD machines, I need differing ports knobs settings. I share a > single NFS /usr/ports across these machines. There *must* be some > ports-related make config file in /etc. Hell, you are the *third* person that asks me the same question (see below). -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: ports.conf Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:36:32 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Vega International Capital To: Peter Pentchev CC: Alexander Langer , arch@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20010828221018.A31427@zerogravity.kawo2.rwth-aachen.d> <3B8CDC38.EC1EE32C@FreeBSD.org> <20010829165544.C780@ringworld.oblivion.bg> Peter Pentchev wrote: >[...] > Errr.. I believe that the whole point of ports.conf is that it is > a place for user-specified settings. bsd.port.mk gets unconditionally > overwritten at each CVSup run (and not everyone is using checked-out > CVS trees); ports.conf does not. The situation is similar to > /etc/defaults/rc.conf and /etc/rc.conf. Err, as I already clarified I meant *defaults* could be placed into bsd.ports.mk. The whole my point is that I do not see any reason for a separate ${PORTSDIR}/ports.conf (or ports.conf in any other dir in ${PORTSDIR}), which gets unconditionally included into bsd.port.mk. For the record, I do not see any reason for separating user-configurable /etc/ports.conf from /etc/make.conf too, but I do not care either, because I could simply ignore it and continue using /etc/make.conf just like I was doing during the last several years. IMO, proposed change and whole thread in spite of 4.4 release helps nothing and only drives developers' attention from the real problems ("how many bento errors have you fixed today?"). Am I alone feeling like this? -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message