Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:29:46 +0100
From:      Dominic Fandrey <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de>
To:        Rong-en Fan <grafan@gmail.com>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org, Pav Lucistnik <pav@freebsd.org>, d@delphij.net
Subject:   Re: ports.conf: Is there a reason behind not being default?
Message-ID:  <4769550A.4090007@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <6eb82e0712190244p51042783vf8fd1d52a297c90d@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4767283D.70604@delphij.net> <20071218144900.M51742@FreeBSD.org>	<4767F263.2000708@gmx.de> <6eb82e0712190244p51042783vf8fd1d52a297c90d@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rong-en Fan wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2007 12:16 AM, Dominic Fandrey <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Pav Lucistnik wrote:
>>> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:54:05 -0800, Xin LI wrote
>>>
>>>> I think that ports-mgmt/portconf (a.k.a. /usr/local/etc/ports.conf)
>>>>  is a very handy feature that makes it much easier to store port options
>>>> across upgrade.  Is there a reason behind not making it into
>>>> bsd.ports.mk?  IMHO it's a big deal to take the script into
>>>> ports/Tools/scripts, and move the configuration to somewhere like
>>>> /etc/ports.conf...
>>> I haven't checked it out yet. What can it do that can't be done in
>>> /etc/make.conf with constructs like
>>>
>>> .if ${.CURDIR} == "/usr/ports/editors/vim"
>>> WITH_GTK2=yes
>>> .endif
>>>
>>> ?
>> Actually it can only do less than that (and it won't work if /usr/ports is a
>> symlink, at least the last time I checked). The only advantage is a more
> 
> It can, see commit log
> 
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/ports-mgmt/portconf/pkg-install

Why doesn't it do something like

PORTSDIR!=cd /usr/ports && pwd -P || exit 0

to avoid having to hard-code it during install?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4769550A.4090007>