Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 03:50:14 -0800 (PST) From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: hoek@hwcn.org Cc: doconnor@gsoft.com.au, imp@village.org, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DRAFT: ports.7 Message-ID: <199801281150.DAA05829@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980127211106.28748A-100000@james.hwcn.org> (message from Tim Vanderhoek on Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:17:45 -0500 (EST))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* If bsd.port.mk can't find the portdir, it will go on happily * compiling your port until it fails due to a missing dependency. * * [This is probably a bad thing --- it should abort on a failed * dependency, since dependencies are, well, dependencies] You are probably right, but I thought since some of the dependencies are rather "soft" (especially RUN_DEPENDS), it's better to not be too strict here. What do people think? It is a trivial change to bsd.port.mk to do it the other way.... Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801281150.DAA05829>