Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-08 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Ruslan Ermilov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > There's no possibility to easily make what you want, i.e., disable > SSP for some parts of the tree. Doing it for particular makefiles > OTOH should be pretty easy, by starting a makefile with the > following two lines: That's not "what Jeremie wants",

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-05 Thread Jeremie Le Hen
Hi Ruslan, On Fri, Sep 05, 2008 at 06:02:04PM +0400, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > This is not the way the things were designed to work. > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2006-March/061725.html > > WITH_*/WITHOUT_* are for users, and MK_* are for makefiles. > > NO_*'s are mainly

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-05 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Fri, Sep 05, 2008 at 09:00:28AM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > Dag-Erling, > > On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 09:26:28PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > > Jeremie Le Hen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > If SSP belongs to this list, then NO_SSP is an alias for WITHOUT_SSP. > > > But it will still

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-05 Thread Jeremie Le Hen
Dag-Erling, On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 09:26:28PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Jeremie Le Hen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > If SSP belongs to this list, then NO_SSP is an alias for WITHOUT_SSP. > > But it will still not be possible to use WITH_SSP in src.conf or > > command-line. > > [...] >

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-04 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Jeremie Le Hen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If SSP belongs to this list, then NO_SSP is an alias for WITHOUT_SSP. > But it will still not be possible to use WITH_SSP in src.conf or > command-line. > [...] > Shouldn't we have a knob that overrides whatever the user says, only for > internal use in

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-04 Thread Jeremie Le Hen
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 04:48:28PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > bsd.own.mk: > >184 # >185 # Supported NO_* options (if defined, MK_* will be forced to "no", >186 # regardless of user's setting). >187 # >188 .for var in \ >189 INSTALLLIB \ >190 MAN

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-04 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Jeremie Le Hen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > There is a problem is the user defines WITH_SSP in src.conf or on > command-line. In this case, bsd.own.mk screams because both WITH_SSP > and WITHOUT_SSP are defined. Try to make buildworld with -DWITH_SSP, > and it won't even fill your terminal befor

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-04 Thread Jeremie Le Hen
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 03:57:20PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Rui Paulo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Jeremie Le Hen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > My leaning is to create an additional knob NO_SSP, much like > > > NO_CPU_CFLAGS, that could be set internally. However I'm not sure it

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-04 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Rui Paulo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jeremie Le Hen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > My leaning is to create an additional knob NO_SSP, much like > > NO_CPU_CFLAGS, that could be set internally. However I'm not sure it > > complies with the src.conf(5) policy. Any objection to the patch below?

Re: Creation of the NO_SSP build knob

2008-09-04 Thread Rui Paulo
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 02:46:53PM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > Hello, > > There is currently a knob to enable/disable SSP: WITH_SSP or > WITHOUT_SSP. WITH_SSP is the default on -CURRENT, so no one had to put > WITH_SSP= in src.conf(5). This has hidden the following bug so far: > > When build