I prefer to keep UPnP support as a flavor to avoid installing unnecessary dependencies for users who do not need this functionality.we don't generally do that in ports, it increases the burden on people testing an update diff because then they need to check both versions if it doesn't change the behaviour unless a setting is also changed, we would usually not add a flavour
Thank you for informing me. I'm new to porting software to OpenBSD and still learning the common practices. If this option doesn't alter the software's behavior, would it be possible to apply Jeremie Courreges-Anglas's diff?
Index: Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/cvs/ports/net/i2pd/Makefile,v diff -u -p -r1.25 Makefile --- Makefile 29 Aug 2024 15:49:13 -0000 1.25 +++ Makefile 29 Aug 2024 21:34:00 -0000 @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ COMMENT = client for the I2P anonymous n GH_ACCOUNT = PurpleI2P GH_PROJECT = i2pd GH_TAGNAME = 2.53.1 +REVISION = 0 CATEGORIES = net HOMEPAGE = https://i2pd.website @@ -12,14 +13,17 @@ PERMIT_PACKAGE = Yes WANTLIB += ${COMPILER_LIBCXX} boost_atomic-mt boost_date_time-mt WANTLIB += boost_filesystem-mt boost_program_options-mt boost_system-mt -WANTLIB += c crypto m ssl z +WANTLIB += c crypto m miniupnpc ssl z COMPILER = base-clang ports-gcc MODULES = devel/cmake -LIB_DEPENDS = devel/boost +LIB_DEPENDS = devel/boost \ + net/miniupnp/miniupnpc # for tests USE_GMAKE = Yes + +CONFIGURE_ARGS = -DWITH_UPNP=ON WRKSRC = ${WRKDIST}/build
