Consider the following example. Some port option, FOO, does not make
sense with some flavor because the feature behind FOO should always be
enabled when the flavor is chosen. Before this change, when the port's
Makefile included, e.g., FOO_CONFIGURE_WITH=foo, even though FOO was
excluded, --without-foo would be added to CONFIGURE_ARGS. With this
change, do not process option helpers for such an option.
Details
Details
- Reviewers
- None
- Group Reviewers
portmgr
Will ask for a exp-run.
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- R11 FreeBSD ports repository
- Lint
No Lint Coverage - Unit
No Test Coverage - Build Status
Buildable 57328 Build 54216: arc lint + arc unit
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Adding some IRC discussion here.
<bapt> in your flavor the option should not even exist for a start
<bapt> so your should not need D44929
<jrm> bapt: If there are, say, 4 flavors, it makes more sense (to me) to exclude those options from that one flavor rather than adding them to the three other flavors.
<jrm> bapt: But [in any case], it seems better not to mess with option helpers for excluded options, no?
Let's say the option FOO does not make sense on some *arch*, so we exclude it. Should we still add things such as --without-foo to CONFIGURE_ARGS because the port contains FOO_CONFIGURE_WITH=foo?