Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>