Date: Sat, 13 May 1995 16:40:21 -0700 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=) To: ache@astral.msk.su Cc: CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-share@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/mk bsd.port.mk Message-ID: <199505132340.QAA00970@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <FK46AjlmZ2@astral.msk.su> (ache@astral.msk.su)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* I don't think that it is right direction, just simple remove * from top level Makefile is enough. Major objection is that * 'make install' register installed soft into /var/db/pkg (and * not build any tarball), so it is easy for user to remove installed * port later. There is no legal problem here. If user decide to * build port, he can register it. Ah, you're right. I don't know why "fake-pkg" was enclosed by "if ! defined(NO_PACKAGE)". I took out the test, thanks. I don't think taking things out the upper-level Makefile is a good idea unless it's absolutely necessary, there are a whole bunch of things (like "make clean", "make index") that we want to descend into the individual ports no matter what the legal situation is. Our current framework (SUBDIR list for subdirectories, "broken" and "restricted" as comments) is not very good anyway. I'm open to suggestions.... Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199505132340.QAA00970>