Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 16:16:48 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Thomas Moestl <tmoestl@gmx.net> Cc: Scott Long <scott_long@btc.adaptec.com>, re-builders@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Something's wrong with ports/devel... Message-ID: <20030111001648.GA1517@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <20030110235016.GG1732@crow.dom2ip.de> References: <20030110214547.GA1100@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <3E1F43AF.40002@btc.adaptec.com> <20030110222829.GA1196@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030110224115.GE1732@crow.dom2ip.de> <20030110230233.GA1296@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030110235016.GG1732@crow.dom2ip.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 12:50:16AM +0100, Thomas Moestl wrote:
> > Put differently: is it the intention of the makefile writer to
> > replace the value of ${_CPUCFLAGS} with the empty string or is
> > it the intention to replace the literal "${_CPUCFLAGS} with the
> > empty string?
>
> My first patch was bogus (I was fooled by the combination of :=, :S
> and undefined values), the intent is to replace the value with the
> empty string. I've committed a working fix now; of course, make should
> probably just ignore S///g, but I guess that's nothing we want to fix
> in RELENG_5_0 right now :)
Ok. I'll wait until I see it labeled and restart the release. In
the mean time I've posted a patch for make(1). As you say, it
(the fix for make(1)) doesn't really have to go in 5.0-R, but it's
good to have it discussed, argued, committed, backed-out and so
on and so forth :-)
Thanks for your help in nailing this down!
--
Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ia64" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030111001648.GA1517>