From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 12:27:48 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1715E657; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:27:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com) Received: from smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.157.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CDEBE5A; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:27:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mr17.lnh.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.157.37]) by smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2013 07:27:43 -0500 Received: from smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.157.104]) by mr17.lnh.mail.rcn.net (MOS 4.3.4-GA) with ESMTP id BXW74300; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 07:27:40 -0500 X-Auth-ID: anat Received: from pool-71-187-31-131.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net (HELO [192.168.1.8]) ([71.187.31.131]) by smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2013 07:27:40 -0500 Message-ID: <511CD83C.107@aldan.algebra.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 07:27:40 -0500 From: "Mikhail T." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130209 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "O. Hartmann" Subject: Re: Re: ports include /etc/src.conf? i.e. graphics/libfpx References: <511B662C.7030602@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <511B874A.7080901@kbh.biglobe.ne.jp> <511BBDAD.1080806@zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <511BBDAD.1080806@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:31:36 +0000 Cc: Tom Evans , Kimmo Paasiala , "free >> Current FreeBSD" , Ports FreeBSD , Yamaya Takashi X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:27:48 -0000 13.02.2013 11:22, O. Hartmann написав(ла): >> > If this is taken literally then could it be said that ports that use >> > bsd.lib.mk are broken because they are using makefile includes from >> > the source tree? >> > >> > -Kimmo For one, the particular port (its Makefile.bsd) was created in 2001, five years before src.conf appeared. The intent of creating a separate src.conf, I believe, was to shield a world-build from "crazy" options someone could've put into their make.conf for the benefit of building a port or two... But I may be mistaken. > I would consider them broken! On the contrary. I wish, more ports were using the system's bsd.*.mk collection -- instead of the godawful autoconf, for example. What does the port's Makefile.bsd say? It says: "These are the sources, this is the name of the library I want. Please, create it." That's all... It is how things are supposed to be, in my opinion. If the bsd.*.mk collection was not meant to be used outside of /usr/src, then it wouldn't be installed (under /usr/share/mk) for the decades, that BSD exists. Maybe, the bsd.*.mk collection should be smarter -- and not include src.conf -- when .CURDIR is outside of /usr/src. I'm not sure... > How could I track down problems if they are results of intermixed config > files when the manpage explicitely tells me, that the /etc/src.conf is > only for the build of the operating system? If the manual says that, it is incorrect -- if only because it does not reflect (as you've experienced) the practice, that existed long before the manual was written. As for your tracking down problems, I'd say, it should be very easy for you to recognize the flags you've added by hand -- even if you've added them to where you believed, they would not affect a port. -mi