Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:32:57 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@portaone.com> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/asterisk Makefile Message-ID: <4034C919.4090401@portaone.com> In-Reply-To: <xzpisi3w3y8.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <200402191122.i1JBMdHd026435@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040219135233.GK35012@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> <4034C24E.60709@portaone.com> <xzpisi3w3y8.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@portaone.com> writes:
>
>>This is the only reason. By design of ports system, when you are
>>moving ports tree around you should set PORTSDIR. Please see my recent
>>corresponsence with Kris.
>
>
> You should not need to set PORTSDIR if you have a symlink in place,
> and pretty much anyone with any Unix experience will assume that
> wherever you put it, the ports tree will "just work" as long as
> /usr/ports is symlinked to its real location. Please fix your port
> and your attitude.
Who tells that? Is that voice of God or maybe Satoshi Asami has returned?
Des, please don't speak up when you don't know what you are talking
about Instead you have to fix your own attitute, thich nowadays is about
sticking your nose into the areas in which you don't have even sligtest
expertise.
The real problem is that ${.CURDIR} in make(1) evaluates not to current
working directory but to realpath(3)-like "real" path. Can bmake gurus
comment on this?
-Maxim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4034C919.4090401>