Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 17:55:31 -0500 (EST) From: Tim Vanderhoek <ac199@hwcn.org> To: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> Cc: Tim Vanderhoek <hoek@FreeBSD.ORG>, green@feldman.dyn.ml.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/5894 Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980307162653.191C-100000@localhost> In-Reply-To: <19980307173331.08663@follo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 7 Mar 1998, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> As far as I can tell, only the port itself has been changed, not the
> actual TCL install. I don't use TCL much, and don't really want to
> mess about with those ports - can you fix the script install?
I suppose... First, though, I think it's important to find a way
to prevent
pkg_add tcl-8.0
pkg_add tcl-4.2
pkg_delete tcl-4.2
from deleting the /usr/local/bin/wish|tclsh script we've just
installed.
This is important because a given tcl/tk port may not compile
properly in the presence of this generic script. Port
committers, who (speaking for myself, at least) regularly go
through the equivalent of the above sequence of commands, will
not catch the broken port. It would eventually show up when the
port is built on the package-building machine, of course, but
that's a PITA.
What's the easiest way to conditionalize this in pkg/PLIST?
@unexec j=`eval "echo %D/bin/wish[^8].[^0]"` ; \
if expr "$j" : ".*\[^8]\.\[^0 ]" ; then rm %D/bin/wish ; fi
Ugh. That's yucky. :)
Can someone suggest a slightly less masochistic way?
--
tIM...HOEk
OPTIMIZATION: the process of using many one-letter variables names
hoping that the resultant code will run faster.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980307162653.191C-100000>