From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 12 13:10:18 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 426FF16A401 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:10:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from boris@brooknet.com.au) Received: from jay.exetel.com.au (jay.exetel.com.au [220.233.0.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FCF443D68 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:10:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from boris@brooknet.com.au) Received: (qmail 6397 invoked by uid 507); 12 Apr 2006 23:10:09 +1000 Received: from 180.205.233.220.exetel.com.au (HELO ?192.168.0.157?) (220.233.205.180) by jay.exetel.com.au with SMTP; 12 Apr 2006 23:10:09 +1000 In-Reply-To: <443CFB67.6040005@ebs.gr> References: <12B35022-89C3-4A5B-ACE3-1C3145974AF9@brooknet.com.au> <443CFB67.6040005@ebs.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v749.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <731CD3BD-C0C3-4452-81B7-C997547F76FD@brooknet.com.au> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Sam Lawrance Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:10:08 +1000 To: Panagiotis Astithas X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.749.3) Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Doug Barton Subject: Re: What does BATCH=yes really mean? (portmaster vs. bpm) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:10:18 -0000 On 12/04/2006, at 11:06 PM, Panagiotis Astithas wrote: > Sam Lawrance wrote: >> Just hours ago I went to give sysutils/portmaster a try. An >> OPTIONS selection screen appeared on the first run. I then ran >> the following command, thinking I could leave portmaster going and >> wander off: >> portmaster -a -m "BATCH=yes" >> Again an OPTIONS dialog appeared. It seems that portmaster was >> running the command 'make BATCH=yes config', which is an >> interactive operation. I'm not sure whether this is incorrect >> behaviour from the 'config' target, or perhaps a deficiency in >> portmaster. I'm sure there are easy ways to work around the >> problem, but special cases are pesky. >> Perhaps there are other targets for which this behaviour would be >> unexpected. Thoughts? > > I'm not sure if you implied it in the subject line, but one similar > occasion is when upgrading using sysutils/bpm. Since bpm uses > portupgrade to perform the actual work, a configuration dialog is > waiting for the user's input, but the user is unable to receive > this input and take action. > > I've sent bpm's author a patch that avoids this issue in that > context, but I believe your assumption that BATCH should imply "use > the default options" is correct. OK, I had no idea that sysutils/bpm existed. In my original post, s/ bpm/bsd.port.mk/ :-)