Philip M. Gollucci píše v čt 21. 05. 2009 v 22:34 -0400:
> > +20090521:
> > +AUTHOR: port...@freebsd.org
> > +
> > + * bsd.port.options.mk is now clear to be widely used.
> > +
>
> Are there any existing examples of how one should use this or porters
> handbook sections ?
There is an example in
On Thu, 21 May 2009 22:30:35 -0500
Scot Hetzel wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
> wrote:
> >> +20090521:
> >> +AUTHOR: port...@freebsd.org
> >> +
> >> + * bsd.port.options.mk is now clear to be widely used.
> >> +
> >
> > Are there any existing examples of how one sh
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
wrote:
>> +20090521:
>> +AUTHOR: port...@freebsd.org
>> +
>> + * bsd.port.options.mk is now clear to be widely used.
>> +
>
> Are there any existing examples of how one should use this or porters
> handbook sections ?
>
The comments in bsd.port
* Andrew Pantyukhin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > So am I missing something or is it as trivial as using these four
> > > lines instead of one:
> > >
> > > USEOPTIONSMK= yes
> > > INOPTIONSMK= yes
> > > .include "bsd.port.mk"
> > > .undef INOPTIONSMK
> > This is even uglier than our e
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 01:18:31PM +0100, Shaun Amott wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 02:00:14AM +0400, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> >
> > So am I missing something or is it as trivial as using these four
> > lines instead of one:
> >
> > USEOPTIONSMK= yes
> > INOPTIONSMK=yes
> > .in
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 02:00:14AM +0400, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
>
> So am I missing something or is it as trivial as using these four
> lines instead of one:
>
> USEOPTIONSMK= yes
> INOPTIONSMK= yes
> .include "bsd.port.mk"
> .undef INOPTIONSMK
This is even uglier than our existing work-arou
Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
* Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
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) r
Andrew Pantyukhin píše v út 11. 09. 2007 v 02:00 +0400:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 06:58:34PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> > Dmitry Marakasov píše v po 10. 09. 2007 v 19:26 +0400:
> > > * Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > It's possible to use this feature, but only on -CUR
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 06:58:34PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> Dmitry Marakasov píše v po 10. 09. 2007 v 19:26 +0400:
> > * Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > > > > It's possible to use this feature, but only on -CURRENT and -STABLE
> > > > > FreeBSD systems newer than certain date
On Sep 10, 2007, at 1:15 PM, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
Create a port of that, the old FreeBSD versions depend on it to
install in
/usr/share/mk. I kind of don't like it, but it looks like it's only a
solution if it has to be in /usr/share/mk.
Doesn't solve anything. The files get installed _afte
* Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Understood. Then we really have to wait till 5.5 and 6.2 EOL to use
> > options.mk... That's a bit strange to wait multiple years for an
> > useful feature, aren't there any workaround planned?
> The question is, are there any workarounds possible?
We
Jeremy Messenger píše v po 10. 09. 2007 v 12:07 -0500:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:58:34 -0500, Pav Lucistnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Dmitry Marakasov píše v po 10. 09. 2007 v 19:26 +0400:
> >> * Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >>
> >> > > > It's possible to use this feature, but
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:58:34 -0500, Pav Lucistnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dmitry Marakasov píše v po 10. 09. 2007 v 19:26 +0400:
* Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > It's possible to use this feature, but only on -CURRENT and
-STABLE
> > > FreeBSD systems newer than certain da
Dmitry Marakasov píše v po 10. 09. 2007 v 19:26 +0400:
> * Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > > > 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 upcom
* Pav Lucistnik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > 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
Dmitry Marakasov escribió:
Hi!
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 doesn't work, but using full path wo
Dmitry Marakasov píše v po 10. 09. 2007 v 02:01 +0400:
> > > 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
* 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 doe
Dmitry Marakasov píše v ne 09. 09. 2007 v 23:46 +0400:
> 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 do
19 matches
Mail list logo
