Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:21:23 +0100 From: "Dampure, Pierre Y." <pierre.dampure@alveley.org> To: Thomas Stromberg <tstromberg@rtci.com> Cc: Stephan van Beerschoten <stephanb@whacky.net>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mtree -L problems in ports Message-ID: <397DB073.EAC30BE2@alveley.org> References: <20000725093521.A636@caerdonn.eurocontrol.fr> <7m3dkyo03p.wl@waterblue.imgsrc.co.jp> <20000725151211.A44014@enigma.whacky.net> <397D9D94.8242C57E@rtci.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thomas Stromberg wrote: > > It's probably been fixed by now, but what I did when I first had the > mtree > problem was set NO_MTREE in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk - Not sure of the > side > affects though (anyone care to enligtnen me?) > > Im sure there is a more elegant solution, I was just looking for a > quicky. > It is not fixed. Th current version of /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.ports.mk still has an OS version test to determine whether to use the -L flag -- committed by Satoshi Asami after the initial "no -L, now -L" move. The move was later backed out, but not this change. The whole issue of mtree behaviour has been discussed ad nauseam on cvs-all. Up until a concensus is reached, it's most probably easier to locally override MTREE_ARGS. Regards, PYD To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?397DB073.EAC30BE2>