Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:24:37 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: Vivek Khera <khera@kcilink.com> Subject: Re: NO_ knobs in /etc/make.conf Message-ID: <200801230924.37310.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <99B0737B-9876-4D86-A9DC-FB5FAD21CB21@kcilink.com> References: <47949811.1080505@raad.tartu.ee> <479501BE.4040309@FreeBSD.org> <99B0737B-9876-4D86-A9DC-FB5FAD21CB21@kcilink.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 12:36:47 pm Vivek Khera wrote: > > On Jan 21, 2008, at 3:34 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > > > There is a cross-reference to src.conf(5) at the end of > > make.conf(5), but IMO the connection needs to be made more explicit. > > Anyone want to take that on? This should also go in the release > > notes if it's not already. > > So do I need to move my settings from make.conf to src.conf, or can I > just leave it as-is and not worry about it. Reading the make.conf man > page implies it will just continue to work without change. You can just s/NO_/WITHOUT_/g on your /etc/make.conf and leave them there. > What was broken that required this to be "fixed"? Inconsistent use of what NO_FOO= meant. Some places only checked if it was set, other places required it to be set to "yes", so NO_FOO=no might disable FOO or it might not. The WITHOUT_* / WITH_* scheme was chosen to be compatible with how ports works. If WITHOUT_FOO is defined then FOO is disabled. If WITH_FOO is defined, then FOO is enabled. The WITH_FOO/WITHOUT_FOO variables end up setting an internal MK_FOO variable to "yes" or "no" and the actual Makefiles for FOO compare MK_FOO to "yes" to see if they should build. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200801230924.37310.jhb>