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 current workflow.
Ok.
Probably it was added in such way because at the beginning there wasn't
the config-conditional target and runing the config target for every
port (re)build was not a bright idea. If I have time I'll try to make a
patch following this rationale, but in the meanwhile my previous patch
seems good enough.
--
Alex Dupre
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
