* Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > CHANGES of 20060930 state that exeperimental bsd.port.options.mk has
> > been added for OPTIONS to be able to influence dependencies. I need that
> > feature for some of my ports, so I wanted to know what's the status for
> > it?
> >
> > .include <bsd.port.options.mk> doesn't work, but using full path works,
> > and makes it possible to use things like USE_QT_VER or USE_SDL
> > conditionally depending on what OPTIONS are set.
> >
> > So, is it possible to use this feature, or are there still any issues
> > not allowing use of options.mk in ports?
> It's possible to use this feature, but only on -CURRENT and -STABLE
> FreeBSD systems newer than certain date. No existing release supports it
> - it will be supported in upcoming 6.3 and 7.0.
Erm, isn't ports code (more or less) release-independent? What's missing
in existing FreeBSD versions that's needed to support options.mk?
As far as I understand, options.mk just make certain parts
(OPTIONS-processing-related) of bsd.port.mk included earlier in the
port's Makefile. I don't see anything release-specific here. Am I wrong?
> I would advise not to use it in your port yet. Maybe in two or three
> years.
8-[ ]
Then what am I to do if I need, say:
OPTIONS= EDITOR "Qt4 editor"
.if defined WITH_EDITOR
USE_QT_VER= 4
MAKE_ARGS+= UIC=${UIC} MOC=${MOC}
.endif
I'll have to not use OPTIONS in this case, am I right?
> Note that hardcoding /usr/ports to your port breaks the port for users
> with nonstandard PORTSDIR.
Well, ../../Mk/bsd.port.options.mk should go then?
--
Best regards,
Dmitry Marakasov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
