Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 26 Jul 2008 23:41:11 +0200
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Dirk Meyer <dirk.meyer@dinoex.sub.org>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Mk/bsd.openssl.mk optimization
Message-ID:  <488B99F7.80602@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <bZMx9YlvdV@dmeyer.dinoex.sub.org>
References:  <y6ttUolvdV@dmeyer.dinoex.sub.org>	<08GlBzRclM@dmeyer.dinoex.sub.org> <op.ueqfl1xy0g54sc@localhost>	<08GlBzRclM@dmeyer.dinoex.sub.org> <4889A1B8.9060900@FreeBSD.org>	<y6ttUolvdV@dmeyer.dinoex.sub.org> <488B15E1.1090802@FreeBSD.org> <bZMx9YlvdV@dmeyer.dinoex.sub.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dirk Meyer wrote:
> Kris Kennaway schrieb:,
> 
>>> openssl does set NOPRECIOUSMAKEVARS=yes,
>>> so that part ist skipped in bsd.port.subdir.mk.
>> OK, but why is this necessary?
> 
> otherwise the build breaks,
> as the length of the commandline reaches a limit.

We're not talking about builds, but other processing of the 
bsd.openssl.mk such as for 'make describe'.  I don't see why 
NOPRECIOUSMAKEVARS should be relevant for that since it's not invoking 
further child makes.

To repeat, why can't you set the openssl variables in bsd.port.subdir.mk 
and pass them in to the port-level make process instead of recomputing 
them with every port?

Kris

P.S. I am not sure that same limit still exists in supported versions anyway



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?488B99F7.80602>