On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:49:38PM +0200, Michael Gmelin wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:57:57 +0200
> Baptiste Daroussin <b...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:33:22PM +0200, Michael Gmelin wrote:
> > > On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:25:27 +0200
> > > Baptiste Daroussin <b...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:18:50PM +0200, Michael Gmelin wrote:
> > > > > Hi
> > > > >
> > > > > I noticed that HAVE_GNOME doesn't work properly with
> > > > > bsd.ports.options.mk yet, so
> > > > >
> > > > > .include <bsd.port.options.mk>
> > > > > .if ${HAVE_GNOME:Mgnomelibs}!=""
> > > > > # ...
> > > > > .endif
> > > > > .include <bsd.port.mk>
> > > > >
> > > > > won't work, while this
> > > > >
> > > > > .include <bsd.port.pre.mk>
> > > > > .if ${HAVE_GNOME:Mgnomelibs}!=""
> > > > > # ...
> > > > > .endif
> > > > > .include <bsd.port.post.mk>
> > > > >
> > > > > does.
> > > > >
> > > > > AFAIK bsd.port.pre.mk/bsd.port.post.mk should be replaced by
> > > > > bsd.port.options.mk/bsd.port.mk in the long term, so having this
> > > > > work or documenting a workaround would help port maintainers
> > > > > who are in the process of updating the port structure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Michael Gmelin
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
> > > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> > > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> > > > > "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
> > > >
> > > > Which ports are you speaking about? given that
> > > > HAVE_GNOME:#gnomelibs is refering to gnome 1.4 I think this part
> > > > can safely be dropped out.
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > > Bapt
> > >
> > > I'm talking about the feature in general, it also applies to
> > > HAVE_GNOME:Mesound, HAVE_GNOME:Mpygnomeextras etc.
> > >
> > > I stumbled over this while converting polish/gnugadu2 to OptionsNG
> > > (http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=172427).
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michael Gmelin
> >
> > imho HAVE_GNOME should die, as autodectection of what you have does
> > not fit at all with package building. Thing shouldn't been added
> > magically because they are on your system but only on explicit demand
> > of the maintainer/user.
> >
> > That said I'll have a look at the PR.
> >
> > regards,
> > Bapt
>
> I found this behaviour in many ports and I agree that by
> default people should be able to explicitly state what they want. On
> the other hand it can be extremely convenient to get all plugins your
> system supports by default (for those of us you build their ports
> themselves). I solved this in this PR by adding an "AUTODETECT" option,
> that allows the port to detect automatically only when explicitly asked
> by the builder. I had that turned on by default to make sure
> the port behaves exactly like it did before conversion to OptionsNG
> (it's not my lawn, you know). The committer changed that to be off by
> default, since this is a better solution for package building and I
> agree with him.
>
> Also note that there are a lot of ports that use either techniques for
> auto detection (e.g. checking for the existence of libraries to bring
> in functionality) and that those should be covered as well - simply not
> allowing auto detection will massively reduce functionality, so using
> an OPTION to allow it might be the way to go. I think AUTODETECT might
> be an interesting candidate for bsd.options.mk though.
>
> MichaelAutodetection will only work in the case a ports is build on a end-user machine directly, as soon as it is build in a sane environmenent like poudriere/tinderbox/pointyhat then it will completly fail, and won't bring the feature. regards, Bapt
pgp8p9NI1TXOq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
