Alex Dupre wrote:
The attached patch should solve this erratic behavior.
Another quick patch, that removes handling OPTIONS as a special case.
--
Alex Dupre
--- bsd.port.mk.orig2008-09-19 23:15:37.0 +0200
+++ bsd.port.mk 2008-09-19 23:29:30.0 +0200
@@ -3229,17 +3229,6 @@
.
John Baldwin wrote:
Ahh, I think I see now. It requires one OPTIONS using port to mask the
dependencies.
Exactly.
I thought the same thing, probably yes, but I dunno why it was added in
such way from the beginning, so I tried to create the simplest and
surely working patch maintaining the c
On Thursday 18 September 2008 03:18:17 pm Alex Dupre wrote:
> John Baldwin wrote:
> > Trust me, since I rebuild from scratch all the time, I quite remember when
> > options were first added and I'd kick off a build of kde or some such
> > overnight and check my screen session in the morning only
John Baldwin wrote:
Trust me, since I rebuild from scratch all the time, I quite remember when
options were first added and I'd kick off a build of kde or some such
overnight and check my screen session in the morning only find it hadn't
build hardly anything b/c it had popped up the option scr
On Thursday 18 September 2008 04:51:11 am Alex Dupre wrote:
> John Baldwin ha scritto:
> > It used to work.
>
> I was thinking the same thing, but actually it never worked in that way.
Trust me, since I rebuild from scratch all the time, I quite remember when
options were first added and I'd kic
John Baldwin ha scritto:
It used to work.
I was thinking the same thing, but actually it never worked in that way.
I was just guessing about how it might not be working now
based on reading the existing logic. I have not delved into the history to
see what has changed.
The attached patch
Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> I also don't think that we can simply tell our users to user portmaster
> or some force-config switches.
If you read my post carefully I was suggesting that using portmaster
would be a temporary workaround while the actual problem is
(hopefully) being fixed.
Doug
--
On Wednesday 17 September 2008 03:44:14 am Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 08:52:31AM +0200, Alex Dupre wrote:
> > Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > >Nevertheless, going back to rev. 1.559 of b.p.m. restores correct
> > >behavior.
> >
> > Are you sure? I didn't try, but that commit see
On Wednesday 17 September 2008 02:41:07 am Alex Dupre wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
> > John was referring to the problem of 'make config' not being called for
> > ports being installed as dependencies of a port that has OPTIONS.
>
> John said (correct me if I'm wrong) that with an up-to-date system
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 08:52:31AM +0200, Alex Dupre wrote:
> Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> >Nevertheless, going back to rev. 1.559 of b.p.m. restores correct
> >behavior.
>
> Are you sure? I didn't try, but that commit seems to add new reasons to
> show up the dialog box while not removing any of th
Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
Nevertheless, going back to rev. 1.559 of b.p.m. restores correct
behavior.
Are you sure? I didn't try, but that commit seems to add new reasons to
show up the dialog box while not removing any of the old ones.
Running "make config-recursive" still works (and it calls r
Doug Barton wrote:
John was referring to the problem of 'make config' not being called for
ports being installed as dependencies of a port that has OPTIONS.
John said (correct me if I'm wrong) that with an up-to-date system
OPTIONS doesn't correctly shows up (when the top port has OPTIONS), bu
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 03:25:12PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> Alex Dupre wrote:
> > Doug Barton ha scritto:
> >> Bug, and at first glance I think your analysis is correct about the
> >> cause.
> >
> > Surely a bug, but the mentioned code is what was added in rev 1.560
> > (http://www.freebsd.org/
Alex Dupre wrote:
> Doug Barton ha scritto:
>> Bug, and at first glance I think your analysis is correct about the
>> cause.
>
> Surely a bug, but the mentioned code is what was added in rev 1.560
> (http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk?r1=1.560#rev1.560)
> exactly to add thi
Doug Barton ha scritto:
Bug, and at first glance I think your analysis is correct about the
cause.
Surely a bug, but the mentioned code is what was added in rev 1.560
(http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk?r1=1.560#rev1.560)
exactly to add this feature, and AFAIR it worke
15 matches
Mail list logo
