Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 16:24:23 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Yoichi NAKAYAMA <yoichi@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: portmgr@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Q] executable search path on bento Message-ID: <20020201162423.B16262@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <wy3d0o13tc.wl@eken7.eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp>; from yoichi@FreeBSD.ORG on Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:22:23PM %2B0900 References: <wy8zaii6vq.wl@eken5.eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <wy3d0o13tc.wl@eken7.eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--s2ZSL+KKDSLx8OML Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:22:23PM +0900, Yoichi NAKAYAMA wrote: > At Tue, 29 Jan 2002 04:59:37 +0900, In freebsd-ports@ list, > Yoichi NAKAYAMA <yoichi@eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp> wrote: > > When I was testing ports/34230 for ja-cannadic update, > > a question arised. That is, what can I assume as > > executable search path for RUN_DEPENDS? > > Especially, I want to know what is the value of PATH > > when bento builds packages. >=20 > I empirically know we can assume /usr/local/bin in PATH. > But I'm not sure about /usr/local/sbin. Can we asuume it > in PATH on bento? It would probably be safer to make no assumptions about the value of $PATH and hard-code the absolute paths explicitly. Kris --s2ZSL+KKDSLx8OML Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8WzG3Wry0BWjoQKURArLXAJ9JCYgUplri6G6/aVPj9AOHNy9vyQCfcUk1 aIN38qRgD2Bg+TJVAhAlFRU= =OWXp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --s2ZSL+KKDSLx8OML-- 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?20020201162423.B16262>