Bug 234700 - cad/opencascade: Do not set VIS_CMAKE_ON twice
Summary: cad/opencascade: Do not set VIS_CMAKE_ON twice
Status: Closed FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Only Me
Assignee: Tobias Kortkamp
URL:
Keywords: patch
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2019-01-07 18:24 UTC by Tobias Kortkamp
Modified: 2019-01-21 19:33 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
tobik: maintainer-feedback-

Attachments
cad__opencascade.diff (977 bytes, patch)
2019-01-07 18:24 UTC, Tobias Kortkamp 		tobik: maintainer-approval? (thierry)
 Details | Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Tobias Kortkamp freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2019-01-07 18:24:35 UTC 
Created attachment 200879 [details]
cad__opencascade.diff

The port specifies VIS_CMAKE_ON twice like this

VIS_CMAKE_ON=           -DUSE_FREEIMAGE:BOOL=ON -DUSE_GL2PS:BOOL=ON     \
                        -DUSE_FREETYPE:BOOL=ON
[...]
VIS_CMAKE_ON=   -D3RDPARTY_FREETYPE_DIR=${LOCALBASE}

The second VIS_CMAKE_ON overwrites the earlier one.  Should the
values be concatenated or can the first VIS_CMAKE_ON be removed?

The attached patch concatenates them and also switches things to
using the opt_CMAKE_BOOL options helper which is a little easier
to read.
Comment 1 commit-hook freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2019-01-21 06:09:49 UTC 
A commit references this bug:

Author: tobik
Date: Mon Jan 21 06:09:01 UTC 2019
New revision: 490820
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/490820

Log:
  cad/opencascade: Do not set VIS_CMAKE_ON twice

  Given no feedback to the contrary do the most sensible thing and
  merge the two VIS_CMAKE_ON together.

  PR:		234700
  Approved by:	thierry (maintainer timeout, 2 weeks)

Changes:
  head/cad/opencascade/Makefile
Comment 2 Thierry Thomas freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2019-01-21 19:33:44 UTC 
(In reply to commit-hook from comment #1)

Thanks! I did not find the time to check that.