Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Jul 2014 07:26:57 -0400
From:      Rick Miller <>
Cc:        FreeBSD Questions <>,
Subject:   Re: Build Ports Without X11?
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 3:23 PM, dweimer <> wrote:

> On 07/29/2014 2:04 pm, Rick Miller wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I am using Poudriere to bulk build packages and encountered a failure that
>> resulted in the program skipping a couple ports.  The failure occurred due
>> to an X11 error.  However, the expectation is that all ports would build
>> without X11 thus negating the need to compile and build all the X11
>> dependancies for various packages.
>> Despite the make.conf (shown below) specifying WITHOUT_X11, all these
>> ports
>> built with X11 support anyway.
>> I'm pretty sure I must be doing something wrong and hoping that someone
>> might be able to lead me to the solution that will compile any port
>> without
>> X11 support.
>> [snip]
> I believe it should be:
> OPTIONS_UNSET="X11" on newer systems.
> However, it appears to not be pulling in the X11 option, but rather the
> GTK2 option.
> perhaps adding OPTIONS_UNSET="GTK2" would work, or just simply use the
> vim-lite port instead of vim, I do this on all my servers (of course none
> are running a GUI), though I haven't read through the Makefiles to be sure
> what else beyond GUI components isn't included in the lite port versus the
> full port, there's a chance it may drop off something else you are wanting.

I changed the /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/10_0-amd64-make.conf as follows,
but the resulting behavior was the same as before making the change.
 Further changing it to remove "WITHOUT_X11" caused poudriere to build an
additional package.

# cat 10_0-amd64-make.conf

I observe no behavior indicating OPTIONS_UNSET worked, despite the change.
 It's apparent poudriere *is* using the file as removing WITHOUT_X11 did
change poudriere's behavior.  Though adding OPTIONS_UNSET did not appear to
change the behavior.  Is there a way to verify poudriere is implementing
these options when building?

Take care
Rick Miller

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>