Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:43:43 +0000 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Optional patching Message-ID: <20071219214343.229ef5f0@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <20071219205340.GD36016@atarininja.org> References: <4D1AAAB26DADCFB11343F6B3@utd59514.utdallas.edu> <47693FE9.20701@gahr.ch> <41364CD63DE952CCB8602A44@utd59514.utdallas.edu> <20071219191306.GC36016@atarininja.org> <20071219201316.1c305f7a@gumby.homeunix.com.> <20071219205340.GD36016@atarininja.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:53:40 -0500
Wesley Shields <wxs@atarininja.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 08:13:16PM +0000, RW wrote:
>
> > I would have thought that the ".if ${ARCH}" method was the only
> > sensible way of doing it. Packages are built without any options
> > set.
>
> They are built using the default OPTIONS in the Makefile - ie: those
> that are specified as "on". If what you say is true then one of my
> ports would not build properly - it requires at least one of a few
> options to be on.
I meant "set" in the normal English sense of the word, as in "set-up",
rather than "set" meaning a boolean value of true.
> Another reason not to put it in as an OPTION is that if the option
> defaults to off the package will fail to build on 64bit platforms.
That was the point I was making.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071219214343.229ef5f0>