From owner-freebsd-ports  Wed Dec  6 03:02:07 1995
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id DAA00983
          for ports-outgoing; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 03:02:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA00974
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 03:02:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.12/8.6.9) id DAA06667; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 03:01:53 -0800
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 03:01:53 -0800
Message-Id: <199512061101.DAA06667@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: jkh@time.cdrom.com
CC: ports@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <13988.818198260@time.cdrom.com> (jkh@time.cdrom.com)
Subject: Re: Proposed change to bsd.port.mk
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

 * I was just thinking today that it might be nice to be able to write
 * your own scripts for traversing the ports tree, so I came up with this:
 * 
 * *** /usr/src/share/mk/bsd.port.mk	Fri Oct  6 00:20:35 1995
 * --- /usr/share/mk/bsd.port.mk	Tue Dec  5 02:24:42 1995
 * ***************
 * *** 402,409 ****
 * --- 402,422 ----
 *   	@${DO_NADA}
 *   .endif
 *   
 * + .if defined(ALL_HOOK)
 * + all_hook:
 * + 	@/usr/bin/env CURDIR=${.CURDIR} DISTNAME=${DISTNAME} \
 * + 	  DISTDIR=${DISTDIR} WRKDIR=${WRKDIR} \
 * + 	  WRKSRC=${WRKSRC} PATCHDIR=${PATCHDIR} SCRIPTDIR=${SCRIPTDIR} \
 * + 	  FILESDIR=${FILESDIR} PORTSDIR=${PORTSDIR} PREFIX=${PREFIX} \
 * + 	  DEPENDS="${DEPENDS}" BUILD_DEPENDS="${BUILD_DEPENDS}" \
 * + 	  RUN_DEPENDS="${RUN_DEPENDS}" X11BASE=${X11BASE} \
 * + 	${ALL_HOOK}
 * + 
 * + all: all_hook
 * + .else
 *   .if !target(all)
 *   all: build
 * + .endif
 *   .endif
 *   
 *   .if !defined(IS_DEPENDED_TARGET)

This seems useful and correct (at least I tested your example :), no
objections from me.  By the way, two small questions about technical
details:

(1) Why don't you just define the new target as "all" and get rid of
    the extra "all: all_hook" line?

(2) The new target should be either moved completely inside the test
    for "!target(all)" or outside (i.e., the added ".endif" should go
    in place of the added ".else").  The way it is now, it's sort of
    confusing as it mixes two tests.

The Gunslinger