From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Aug 24 00:44:27 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA10851 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 00:44:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from vader.cs.berkeley.edu (vader.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.38.234]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA10837; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 00:44:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca10-63.ix.netcom.com [205.186.214.63]) by vader.cs.berkeley.edu (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA19951; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 00:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.8.8/8.6.9) id AAA04029; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 00:43:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 00:43:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199808240743.AAA04029@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> To: ac199@hwcn.org CC: ac199@hwcn.org, vanilla@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: (message from Tim Vanderhoek on Mon, 24 Aug 1998 03:29:24 -0400 (EDT)) Subject: Re: manpages (Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/p5-Term-Query p5-Term-Query-2.0.tgz) From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi Asami) Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org By the way, I take back my comment about NO_INSTALL_MANPAGES. If the software isn't installing manpages by itself, then more likely than not the port Makefile is doing it by ${INSTALL_MAN} -- so it's better to assume "MANCOMPRESSED=no" in that case. (I know, it just blew up in my face.) * It sure seems like a good idea to me. My one worry is that this * would make more work for Steve, vanilla, mph, or one of the * committers who dedicate countless hours to testing and closing * the various PRs that submit updates to ports...? What do you mean? As people submit updates to Makefiles with too many manpages? I thought you were going to write a script to do that. :) * The other possibility is just to let Makefiles use a * ``.include "pkg/MEN"''. That could be much easier. Then it's only one file. * [Of course, a guideline such as "don't use this for less than XX * manpages" should be made.] Definitely. * > +# NO_WRKDIR - There's no work directory at all; port does this someplace * > +# else. * * Obviously still there... Didn't have the energy to look at those that will break.... ;) * Somehow you've changed what was originally a simple change into * something pretty large... :) You will have to look at the new porting.sgml before you say that. I think I can write a book now. * Since so much is changing anyways... Is it worthwhile changing a * few non-absolute paths to absolute ones? I'm not sure what the * original reason for using absolute paths was, but if it was * good... :) * * My cursory scroll-through finds naked pkg_delete, expr, and of * course, many many [. I assume the last one was intentional due * to the fact that even using the short variable form "$[" doubles * its length. :) Well, I've never seen an OS with [ in anywhere else than /bin. * There's also a naked ldconfig on line ~1751. Ok, fixed those too. * [Hehe. I'm tempted to suggest an INSTALLS_SHLIBS variable, now, * but that probably should wait untill after E-day, at least :-] (satoshi rolls his eyes) Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message