Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 18:01:06 +0300 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG> To: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru> Cc: walt <wsheets@sbcglobal.net>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, Bill Fenner <fenner@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Png-1.2.2_1 broken on -CURRENT? Message-ID: <20020517150106.GA44484@sunbay.com> In-Reply-To: <20020517144552.GB23235@nagual.pp.ru> References: <3CE1B2EA.1000900@sbcglobal.net> <20020516235508.GA9554@nagual.pp.ru> <20020517072428.GA75925@sunbay.com> <20020517080609.GA12895@nagual.pp.ru> <20020517142220.GA37843@sunbay.com> <20020517144552.GB23235@nagual.pp.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 06:45:52PM +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 17:22:20 +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > INC{OWN,GRP,MODE} to install include files, where he can pick them no=
w? I
> > > don't mean this particular port, but many ports install includes from=
the
> > > port top level Makefile f.e.
> > >=20
> > That "many" turns out to be 5 ports, if I'm counting correctly:
> >=20
> > $ find -s * -name Makefile | xargs egrep -l "INC(OWN|GRP|MODE)"
>=20
> Umm, I don't mean any particular port at all. Let me rephrase it:
>=20
> If a port needs to install some includes, which mode/group/owner it should
> use? It is more logical to get the same things for them as system
> installed includes have instead of using too general pure ${INSTALL_DATA}.
>=20
Then the logical thing would be to add INSTALL_INCLUDES (or something
like that) to bsd.port.mk, and use that. It's generally much easier
to fix one thing available centrally and officially supported rather
than fix individual makefiles. If we had this (or something like this)
in bsd.port.mk already, I'd have made sure to keep it working before
committing bsd.incs.mk. Because bsd.incs.mk is so much more flexible
and doesn't really need any INC*'s (because the "INC" part can be
anything a particular makefile wants), providing the compatibility
shims in bsd.own.mk doesn't sound like a good option to me.
Currently, our bsd.*.mk makefiles provide way too many knobs, and
remembering everything is nearly impossible. The plan is to standardize
the namespace while still providing the support for well-known
"standard" targets and knobs (variables).
I, for example, plan to add the NO_foo/bar_SUBDIR generic form of
knobs for bsd.subdir.mk that should replace (or be the implementation
detail) of various NO's we now have.
So, for example, setting NO_SENDMAIL would in effect mean:
NO_bin/rmail_SUBDIR
NO_etc/sendmail_SUBDIR
NO_lib/libmilter_SUBDIR
=2E..
NO_lib/libsmutil_SUBDIR
NO_libexec/mail.local_SUBDIR
NO_libexec/smrsh_SUBDIR
NO_share/sendmail_SUBDIR
NO_share/doc/smm/08.sendmailop_SUBDIR
NO_usr.bin/vacation_SUBDIR
=2E..
I'm not yet sure where this stuff goes, perhaps freebsd.no.mk. :-)
Cheers,
--=20
Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA,
ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG,
ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine
http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age
--GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQE85RsyUkv4P6juNwoRAht4AJwOGktN77PSWUfof39xwK2AZOix6wCfZXKD
I1W+lD/jVtaq2XVKsltMTuE=
=OMQH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw--
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020517150106.GA44484>