From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 22 01:15:03 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40FF116A4CE for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:15:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.rdsnet.ro (smtp.rdsnet.ro [62.231.74.130]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B8243D1F for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:15:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: (qmail 30137 invoked by uid 89); 22 Aug 2004 01:15:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO it.buh.tecnik93.com) (81.196.204.98) by 0 with SMTP; 22 Aug 2004 01:15:01 -0000 Received: from it.buh.tecnik93.com (localhost.buh.tecnik93.com [127.0.0.1]) by it.buh.tecnik93.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3C0E010A; Sun, 22 Aug 2004 04:14:59 +0300 (EEST) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 04:14:58 +0300 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu To: David Syphers Message-Id: <20040822041458.40694dc3@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <200408211757.25650.dsyphers@u.washington.edu> References: <200408211717.00316.dsyphers@u.washington.edu> <20040822035125.25ed2cc8@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <200408211757.25650.dsyphers@u.washington.edu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: newbie porter questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:15:03 -0000 On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:57:25 -0700 David Syphers wrote: > On Saturday 21 August 2004 05:51 pm, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:17:00 -0700 > > > First, I have a script that does the installation. I call it with > > > a do-install in the Makefile, '@(cd ${SCRIPTDIR} && > > > ./mod_install)'. > > > > Is this really necessarily ? > > I'm not sure... I decided to use the original install script and just > modify it, but now that I have a better idea of what's going on, I may > just not use it at all. It's better. The time you spend understanding the way the bsd.*.mk works will server you in the future _and_ there are 95% you have to rewrite a large portions of the script to make it obey everything it should. > > > Lastly, I've modified the install scripts that come with the > > > program so that they're no longer interactive. However, they > > > become interactive if there's a failure - rather than just fail, > > > they try to get useful input from the user so they can continue. > > > In this case, should I define IS_INTERACTIVE? If I do, but want to > > > enable package builds, what's the right way of doing: > > > > > > .if (!defined(PACKAGE_BUILDING)) > > > IS_INTERACTIVE= yes > > > .endif > > > > > > The code is wrong, of course, but I don't know what the right way > > > is. I assume it's obvious to humans what I'm trying to do, if not > > > computers... > > > > Should work without parenthesis. On the other hand it shouldn't fail > > :) > > Fails with: > "Makefile", line 19: Unassociated shell command "IS_INTERACTIVE= > yes" > make: fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue You do use a tab on that line and not spaces, right ? -- IOnut Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"