Re: options for forcing use of GCC

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Ian Lepore <ian_at_freebsd.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 22:03 +0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > On 4/28/14, 8:05 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 14:54 +0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > >> On 4/28/14, 12:30 AM, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > >>>   WITH_GCC=yes \
> > >>>   WITH_GNUCXX=yes \
> > >>>   WITHOUT_CLANG=yes \
> > >>>   WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC=yes \
> > >> forgot to ask.. is this in /etc/make.conf?
> > >> or elsewhere?
> > > Actually in our build system we build in a chroot, and we inject those
> > > args into the environment during the builds so that we can have
> > > different options for building world versus cross-world within the
> > > chroot, but I think the more-normal place would be make.conf.
> >
> > we also use a combination of environment and make.conf in a chroot.
> > though people sometimes talk about a src.conf (or is that src.mk?) but
> > I haven't found that one yet.
> > >
> > > -- Ian
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> In theory, /etc/make.conf affects all builds you do -- world, kernel,
> ports, your own apps, everything -- whereas /etc/src.conf affects only
> kernel and world.  I've heard it said that the reality falls short of
> that and src.conf settings inappropriately leak into ports builds.
>
> -- Ian
>

I have also heard this, but a grep of ports/Mk finds no matches to
src\.conf, so this appears to not be the case.

It should not be as the whole purpose of src.conf was to have a make
configuration that would be used to build the system, but not other things.
make.conf already provided for that.

The only exception I might see is the building of a kernel module which
might need to know how the system was made and that would be in the
specific port's Makefile, not a system wide file.

-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
E-mail: rkoberman_at_gmail.com