From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Tue Nov 6 07:37:39 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB81F1109737 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 07:37:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98B5E6AC58 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 07:37:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (mh0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id wA67bZmF087213 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:37:35 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (s1.omnilan.de [217.91.127.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D129910 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:37:35 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Intention of the clean target vs clean-depends From: Harry Schmalzbauer To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <1ec31adb-5916-45de-dd9f-ee6be5a97a44@omnilan.de> Organization: OmniLAN Message-ID: <61d03ae6-4e88-291e-d68f-bfa35ec33b01@omnilan.de> Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:37:34 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1ec31adb-5916-45de-dd9f-ee6be5a97a44@omnilan.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]); Tue, 06 Nov 2018 08:37:35 +0100 (CET) X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: ; Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; ) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 98B5E6AC58 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.05 / 200.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.44)[-0.436,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[omnilan.de]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: mx0.gentlemail.de]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.53)[-0.526,0]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.78)[-0.776,0]; IP_SCORE(-0.00)[country: DE(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:25074, ipnet:2a00:e10:2800::/38, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Server: mx1.freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 07:37:40 -0000 Am 05.11.2018 um 13:03 schrieb Harry Schmalzbauer: > Hello, > > I'm about to overhaul some scripts and continue wondering why 'make > clean' removes ${WRKDIR} of all dependencies, although there's the > clean-depends target. > The comment in bsd.ports.mk makes me think 'clean' shouldn't delete > dependencies: > # clean                 - Remove ${WRKDIR} and other temporary files > used for building. > # clean-depends - Do a "make clean" for all dependencies. > > Thanks fpr clarification, Hello, I'm really interested why it is how it is. I'd highly appreciate if someone can confirm that the current behaviour of the clean: target is the intended behaviour. If so, the clean-depends: can be retired, can it? I'm ignoring this – to my understanding – oddity for more then a decade, without ever stumbling over any scenario where the behaviour would have been self clarifiying. For now I'm using the clean-wrkdir: target instead of clean:, but since nobody answered yet, I guess my question is unclear or I'm missing somthing ultimate obvious, so the question isn't unclear but stupid?!? Thanks, -harry