Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 1 Apr 2014 21:03:05 -0600
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>
Cc:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Simon Gerraty <sjg@juniper.net>
Subject:   Re: make WITH[OUT]_* more useful?
Message-ID:  <00367FFD-4F88-4257-B25F-D4B3F0644FE1@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <E5334597-4951-49A2-BFAA-2B4A6F8C28DD@lists.zabbadoz.net>
References:  <20140401051327.F20F958097@chaos.jnpr.net> <E5334597-4951-49A2-BFAA-2B4A6F8C28DD@lists.zabbadoz.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Apr 1, 2014, at 1:40 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb =
<bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> wrote:

>=20
> On 01 Apr 2014, at 05:13 , Simon Gerraty <sjg@juniper.net> wrote:
>=20
>> # NO_* takes precedence
>> # If both WITH_* and WITHOUT_* are defined, WITHOUT_ wins unless
>> # DOMINANT_* is set to "yes"
>> # Otherwise WITH_* and WITHOUT_* override the default.
>> and
>> MK_* can be pre-set without causing an error.
> ...
>> Thoughts?
>=20
> I am a it worried that we are increasing the number of prefixes again =
rather than reducing it.  I was hoping a while ago that NO_ would die.

That was my plan=85

Warner




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00367FFD-4F88-4257-B25F-D4B3F0644FE1>