From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Nov 4 15:21:20 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from peitho.fxp.org (peitho.fxp.org [209.26.95.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE8737B4CF for ; Sat, 4 Nov 2000 15:21:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by peitho.fxp.org (Postfix, from userid 1501) id 0D2C11360E; Sat, 4 Nov 2000 18:21:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 18:21:21 -0500 From: Chris Faulhaber To: Aaron Smith Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: attempting to port a package with no makefile 'install' rule Message-ID: <20001104182121.A40398@peitho.fxp.org> References: <20001104151406.D78199@gelatinous.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20001104151406.D78199@gelatinous.com>; from aaron-fbsd@mutex.org on Sat, Nov 04, 2000 at 03:14:06PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Nov 04, 2000 at 03:14:06PM -0800, Aaron Smith wrote: > hi, i'm trying to build a port for litestream and i have a stylistic > question about how to formulate my own 'install' rule since litestream's > makefile has none. > > do i use patchfiles to wedge an install rule into the makefile, or is there > a ports-sanctioned 'install' psuedo-target that i should override instead? > i read the porter's handbook and didn't find this addressed. help > appreciated. > See http://www.FreeBSD.org/porters-handbook/c190.html You probably want to create a do-install: target in the port's Makefile. -- Chris D. Faulhaber - jedgar@fxp.org - jedgar@FreeBSD.org -------------------------------------------------------- FreeBSD: The Power To Serve - http://www.FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message