From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Apr 29 2:12:39 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from south.nanolink.com (south.nanolink.com [217.75.134.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ED2F237B417 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 02:12:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 94372 invoked from network); 29 Apr 2002 09:18:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO straylight.ringlet.net) (212.116.140.125) by south.nanolink.com with SMTP; 29 Apr 2002 09:18:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 74787 invoked by uid 1000); 29 Apr 2002 09:12:11 -0000 Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 12:12:11 +0300 From: Peter Pentchev To: Maxime Henrion Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Edwin Groothuis Subject: Re: patch to have make clean not recurse in ${PORTSDIR} Message-ID: <20020429121211.A342@straylight.oblivion.bg> Mail-Followup-To: Maxime Henrion , ports@FreeBSD.org, Edwin Groothuis References: <20020424191430.W62277-100000@zoot.corp.yahoo.com> <20020426204935.GA42922@elvis.mu.org> <3CC9D357.9010105@owt.com> <20020426224107.GB42922@elvis.mu.org> <20020427090419.F56612@k7.mavetju.org> <20020426232017.GC42922@elvis.mu.org> <20020427094000.H56612@k7.mavetju.org> <20020426235247.GD42922@elvis.mu.org> <20020427101938.A77837@k7.mavetju.org> <20020427002814.GE42922@elvis.mu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20020427002814.GE42922@elvis.mu.org>; from mux@freebsd.org on Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 05:28:14PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 05:28:14PM -0700, Maxime Henrion wrote: > Edwin Groothuis wrote: > > > Uh ? In what way ? The only case that my patch would broke that I am > > > able to imagine is if there was some port in /usr/ports depending on > > > another port not itself in this tree but elsewhere, which is *very* > > > unlikely. > >=20 > > It will break if the port itself has a clean-target. Not all of > > them, actually probably close to "none of them" has it, but they > > have the capability to have one and that is something which should > > be reserved. >=20 > That's right. I think it's a good thing if my patch breaks something > which a port shouldn't do anyway, though. :-) My feelings exactly. A port's *build* should not affect anything, repeat, *anything*, outside its work directory. This is even codified in the Porter's Handbook, section 15.3 (well, okay, so the Porter's Handbook is a guide and not a hard-and-fast rulebook, but I think that it would be quite sensible to treat this particular rule as a hard-and-fast one). The 'clean' target cleans up the files generated during the build and the build only. From these two statements, it follows that the 'clean' target should not have - ever - to remove any files outside the port's work directory. I personally cannot think of any case in which a port would ever want to override (or even supplant) the 'clean' target. Feel free to point out some :) G'luck, Peter --=20 Peter Pentchev roam@ringlet.net roam@FreeBSD.org PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 If this sentence didn't exist, somebody would have invented it. --ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q 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 iEYEARECAAYFAjzNDmsACgkQ7Ri2jRYZRVN53gCfQv/ZAHFyr3dKPczQ8dXOeu3n NFgAoJTyo/dTqLgyTXbU2KJdYC/lUzvY =wSL/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message