Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 01:06:04 +0400 From: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov <cvs-src@yandex.ru> To: Michael Scheidell <michael.scheidell@secnap.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: archivers/zip in 9.x: Message-ID: <4F0B56BC.6080601@yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: <4F0B4E5F.8040802@secnap.com> References: <4F0B4E5F.8040802@secnap.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael Scheidell wrote on 10.01.2012 00:30:
> I think I saw something in the list that FreeBSD 9.x has zip already
> built in? so, ports that need 'zip' won't need zip?
>
> for maintainers, they should use something like:
>
> USE_ZIP= yes
>
> to:
>
> if ${OSVERSION} <= 900000
> USE_ZIP= yes
> .endif
>
> and/or BUILD_DEPENDS+= zip:${PORTSDIR}/archivers/zip
>
> (at what OSVERSION was zip included in the base?)
>
>
unzip, not zip. I believe it should be handled in bsd.port.mk like it
done for USE_XZ. Something like:
.if defined(USE_ZIP) && ${OSVERSION} < 900000
EXTRACT_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/unzip:${PORTSDIR}/archivers/unzip
.endif
Correct OSVERSION should be used instead of 900000. There is also should
be some logic for UNZIP_CMD.
--
Regards,
Ruslan
Tinderboxing kills... the drives.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F0B56BC.6080601>