Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 22:15:55 +0300 From: Sergey Skvortsov <skv@protey.ru> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> Cc: perl@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: requst for review: PR/61621 Message-ID: <400ECFEB.40809@protey.ru> In-Reply-To: <528419787.1074703138@andromede.reaumur.absolight.net> References: <400D4EE6.8010003@FreeBSD.org> <447910631.1074622626@andromede.reaumur.absolight.net> <400E4909.5020309@FreeBSD.org> <5310937.1074682561@pouet.in.mat.cc> <400E9591.8040109@protey.ru> <528419787.1074703138@andromede.reaumur.absolight.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mathieu Arnold wrote: > |> And you should define ALL_TARGET?= build so that it has a resonable > |> default I guess. > | > | Empty target also works. > > It would tell people what the default target should be in case they want to > do as they do for regular perl ports ALL_TARGETS="all test" they'll know > that it's not "all" but "build". Agree. > |> And, you'll have to account for M::B build process, it should use > |> PERL_MODBUILD=yes, but it should not depend on M::B, or it'll kinda loop > |> :) > | > | p5-Module-Build should use usual "PERL_CONFIGURE" and redefine > | do-(build|install). > | > | Special check for portname 'p5-Module-Build' in bsd.port.mk is overkill > | and must be avoided. > > That would lead to code dupplication, I don't believe it's good, but well, > if you think it's better this way :) There will be no checking for portname on _every_ port. -- Sergey Skvortsov mailto: skv@protey.ru
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?400ECFEB.40809>