Le Sun, Jan 01, 2023 at 10:40:12AM +0000, Klemens Nanni a écrit : > 01.01.2023 12:41, Landry Breuil пишет: > > Le Sat, Dec 31, 2022 at 12:22:47PM +0000, Klemens Nanni a écrit : > >> xfc4-wavelan spams ~/.xsession with state changes which stems from the > >> xfce DBG macro which gets defined when the DEBUG macro is set, which > >> comes from --enable-debug that is currently passed for every port using > >> XFCE_COMMIT. > >> > >> landry pointed out the XFCE_COMMIT/--enable-debug connection and > >> suggested a DEBUG test -- I failed to look at xfce4.port.mk in the first > >> place. > >> > >> Only four ports use a commit, so bumping them is easy to pick up > >> potential object changes. > >> > >> Feeback? Objection? OK? > > > > I've had a second look at what --enable-maintainer-mode does and it's > > still a bit fuzzy to me, but orage port builds fine without it. So i'd > > completely move the CONFIGURE_ARGS line adding --enable-maintainer-mode > > --enable-debug to the .if defined(DEBUG) block outside of the .if > > defined(XFCE_COMMIT) block, this way all ports can be built with debug > > macros enable via make DEBUG=-g. > > Sure. > > > Dunno if it's a good idea though to link that behaviour it to the ports > > framework DEBUG variable, but we cant add --enable-debug to > > DEBUG_CONFIGURE_ARGS since it'd enable debug macros globally & > > inconditionally. > > Quite a few ports already use DEBUG as condition, I'm not aware of any > other mechanism.
Right, then it makes sense to align with others for consistency. > And yes, DEBUG_CONFIGURE_ARGS is out of question, as you explained. > > > i had another look at --enable-debug in aclocal.m4 which is used in all > > xfce projects, from > > https://gitlab.xfce.org/xfce/xfce4-dev-tools/-/blob/master/m4macros/xdt-features.m4#L61: > > - it also enables some -W flags too, some might lead to build failures > > - the DBG macros are enabled for yes/full in the enable-debug values (eg > > no|minimum|yes|full, minimum being the > > default) > > So a minimal fix would be to keep the logic as is and pass =minimum, but > I don't think that's appropiate. > > OK? Definitely, thanks !
