From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 27 16:43:50 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 BA42A16A4CE; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:43:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from postman.arcor.de (postman4.arcor-online.net [151.189.0.189]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9484443D78; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:43:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com) Received: from fillmore.dyndns.org (port-212-202-51-21.reverse.qsc.de [212.202.51.21]) (authenticated bits=0)i0S0gDM4020996 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:42:14 +0100 (MET) Received: from [172.16.0.2] (helo=fillmore-labs.com) by fillmore.dyndns.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1AldmX-000Dyh-EY; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:42:13 +0100 Message-ID: <40170564.4050107@fillmore-labs.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:42:12 +0100 From: Oliver Eikemeier Organization: Fillmore Labs GmbH - http://www.fillmore-labs.com/ MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sergei Kolobov References: <1075068827.93327.13.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <20040127160204.GA704@chetwood.ru> In-Reply-To: <20040127160204.GA704@chetwood.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9 cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/49955: [PATCH] bsd.port.mk: add target to automatically install port documentation 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: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:43:50 -0000 Sergei Kolobov wrote: > To summarize: > > PORTDOCS dramatically reduces pkg-plist size in case > there are a lot of files and/or subdirs under DOCSDIR. > For example, PORTDOCS=*. > > My patch (let's call it DOCS) is for far more common scenario > (in my experience, at least) - there are just a few docs files > which could (and should) be listed explicitly. > > I just had an idea how this two approaches be combined into > single framework: > > Ports that have few doc files get this: > > DOCS= file1 file2 subdir/file3 this doesn't save you much compared with @cd ${WRKSRC}/doc && ${INSTALL_DATA} file1 file2 subdir/file3 ${DOCSDIR} it yould be interesting when this macro could copy hierarchies. Anyway, do you have a sample port the would benefit from a DOCS macro? I named to Java ports a examples (using javadoc, i.e. junit, java3d, forte, whatever) for the PORTDOCS macro, because - they have dynamically generated documentation, changing often - have a large, deep documentation tree - install the documentation themselves - don't always honour NOPORTDOCS so a good candidate for your patch would be a port with a large, deep documentation tree that isn't installed (bouncycastle). Or is your point that most people are too lazy to write PORTDOCS= NEWS Changelog .ifndef NOPORTDOCS @${MKDIR} ${DOCSDIR} @cd ${WRKSRC} && ${INSTALL_DATA} ${PORTDOCS} ${DOCSDIR} .endif but would use DOCSSRC= NEWS Changelog instead? And please avoid INSTALL_DOCS, it's too similar to INSTALL_MAN.