Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 18 Sep 2010 08:40:08 GMT
From:      Anonymous <swell.k@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: ports/150604: [PATCH] sysutils/superiotool: Fix build with alternate LOCALBASE
Message-ID:  <201009180840.o8I8e8xH010934@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR ports/150604; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Anonymous <swell.k@gmail.com>
To: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
Cc: Tim Bishop <tim@bishnet.net>,  bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/150604: [PATCH] sysutils/superiotool: Fix build with alternate LOCALBASE
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 12:29:02 +0400

 Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> writes:
 
 > Guys,
 >
 > if you need that functionality and you tested the patches and they work, then I
 > approve.
 
 Well, I do need the port to respect CC[1] and CFLAGS[2] because I use
 gcc45 and build all my ports with debug symbols, sometimes with -O0.
 
 The tool's output doesn't seem to change after applying my diff.
 But I don't really use the port.
 
 [1] http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/dads-cc.html
 [2] http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/dads-cflags.html
 
 > Tim's patch is simple enough for me to see through it, but Anonymous' patch
 > seems to be more comprehensive.  If changing '=' to '?=' makes the build really
 > honor values set by port's Makefile, then this change seems to be preferable.
 
 Nah, there is little difference between hardcoding value into Makefile
 by REINPLACE_CMD and using `?='.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201009180840.o8I8e8xH010934>