Summary: | devel/gdb: Explicitly disable guile in configure when GUILE option is disabled | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | Yuri Victorovich <yuri> | ||||
Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | Tijl Coosemans <tijl> | ||||
Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||
Severity: | Affects Only Me | CC: | koobs, luca.pizzamiglio, tijl | ||||
Priority: | --- | Keywords: | easy, needs-qa, patch | ||||
Version: | Latest | Flags: | luca.pizzamiglio:
maintainer-feedback+
tijl: merge-quarterly+ |
||||
Hardware: | Any | ||||||
OS: | Any | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Yuri Victorovich
![]() ![]() Created attachment 162476 [details]
patch
Comment on attachment 162476 [details]
patch
the patch is OK, but I'm not sure that the PORTREVISION should bu bumped.
The patch is fine, but I guess that the PORTREVISION should not be bumped. PS: I don't know why, but I've some trouble to set flags on patches PORTREVISION doesn't matter because this is a minor patch. A commit references this bug: Author: tijl Date: Wed Nov 11 13:12:03 UTC 2015 New revision: 401242 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/401242 Log: - Pass --without-guile to configure when GUILE option is off - Use CONFIGURE_WITH for other options as well PR: 204041 Changes: head/devel/gdb/Makefile @Tijl, does this need MFH? ie; without this change, if guile is installed , will gdb find it, resulting in an untracked dependency, or is/was this change purely proactive? I believe given the description in comment 0, that that is the case A commit references this bug: Author: tijl Date: Wed Nov 11 13:49:57 UTC 2015 New revision: 401245 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/401245 Log: MFH: r401242 - Pass --without-guile to configure when GUILE option is off - Use CONFIGURE_WITH for other options as well PR: 204041 Approved by: ports-secteam (blanket) Changes: _U branches/2015Q4/ branches/2015Q4/devel/gdb/Makefile |