Jase Thew wrote: > On 25/07/2012 23:57, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > because the priority goes to global to specific and the most specific is > > the > > options file. > > > > if most people want the options file to not have the final priority, why > > not, > > can others spread their opinion here? > > I can't see why it would be of benefit for saved options to override > anything passed to make (either env or as an arg), as one of the reasons > you're likely to be passing them is to override any saved settings in > the first place. > > Please consider reverting back to the established and I daresay, > expected behaviour.
I agree with Jase. Actually I'm not sure if PORTS_DBDIR should override make.conf or vice versa. I don't know which one should be regarded as more specific. But anything specified on the commandline is definitely more specific than PORTS_DBDIR and should override anything else. One way to do that would be to introduce another pair of variables, e.g. OVERRIDE_SET and OVERRIDE_UNSET, so you could type: make OVERRIDE_SET=STATIC Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "C++ is the only current language making COBOL look good." -- Bertrand Meyer _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"