Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2019 15:47:30 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> Cc: Martin Matuska <mm@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r503801 - in head/graphics/exiftran: . files Message-ID: <20190630154730.GA21108@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.21.1906301741020.6112@anthias.pfeifer.com> References: <201906090644.x596iCon058100@repo.freebsd.org> <20190610041555.GA98022@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.LSU.2.21.1906301741020.6112@anthias.pfeifer.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 05:41:50PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 06:44:12AM +0000, Martin Matuska wrote: > >> New Revision: 503801 > >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/503801 > >> +CFLAGS+= -I${LOCALBASE}/include > >> + > > So what's the point to amend CFLAGS here?.. > > >> -CFLAGS+= -I${PREFIX}/include -I${.CURDIR}/../../jpeg/80 \ > >> - -I${.CURDIR}/../.. -DHAVE_NEW_EXIF > >> +CFLAGS+= -I${LOCALBASE}/include \ > > ... If you also do the same here? > > In any case, isn't this more a case of using USES=localbase ? Not necessarily: since the Makefile is already patched (for other valid reasons), there's nothing wrong with handling LOCALBASE alongside, as long as it's correctly expanded by make(1), and it usually is. USES+=localbase is tycally used as a quick shortcut when you don't want to create a patch or mess with sed(1) to simply teach the port where to look for headers and libraries. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20190630154730.GA21108>