From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 7 21:47:04 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F8F616A4B3; Tue, 7 Oct 2003 21:47:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.lovett.com (sentinel.ranger.supernews.net [216.168.1.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D8D243FD7; Tue, 7 Oct 2003 21:47:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ade@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 44ba06102.mdfrd.or.charter.com ([68.186.6.102] helo=FreeBSD.org) by mail.lovett.com with asmtp (Exim 4.22) id 1A76E3-000OqP-B3; Wed, 08 Oct 2003 04:47:03 +0000 Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 21:47:00 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552) To: Joseph Koshy From: Ade Lovett In-Reply-To: <200310080340.h983eWle046442@freefall.freebsd.org> Message-Id: <744C0E6D-F94A-11D7-9782-000A956B6386@FreeBSD.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) cc: ports@FreeBSD.org cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/38090: devel/m4 port PREFIX vs LOCALBASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 04:47:04 -0000 On Tuesday, Oct 7, 2003, at 20:40 US/Pacific, Joseph Koshy wrote: > -CONFIGURE_ENV+= M4=${LOCALBASE}/bin/gm4 > +CONFIGURE_ENV+= M4=$(which gm4) Hrm. Not too keen on this idea, since bad things happen if 'which gm4' doesn't return a path, though this is also true of the hardcoded solution. Something along the lines GM4?= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/gm4 CONFIGURE_ENV+= M4=${GM4} [...] post-extract: .if !exists(${GM4}) @${ECHO_CMD} "Unable to locate GNU M4" @${FALSE} .endif Would allow for maximum flexibility for those who put gm4 in odd places. However, I'm still not really convinced, given the number of other ports that assume that things are installed in ${LOCALBASE} or ${X11BASE}. In my opinion, if a user is prepared to make those changes, then there could well be breakage elsewhere, particularly in the case where things are installed outside of a ${LOCALBASE} or ${X11BASE} scenario. I guess it could be wrapped into a USE_GM4 variable, once the massive amount of GNU tool hacking in bsd.port.mk is shifted out to bsd.gnutools.mk. Thoughts?