From owner-freebsd-ports Thu May 14 21:11:35 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA00765 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Thu, 14 May 1998 21:11:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from hwcn.org (ac199@james.hwcn.org [199.212.94.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA00751 for ; Thu, 14 May 1998 21:11:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hoek@hwcn.org) Received: from localhost (ac199@localhost) by hwcn.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA29841; Fri, 15 May 1998 00:05:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 00:05:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek To: John Birrell cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Supporting multiple architectures in ports In-Reply-To: <199805150012.KAA16264@cimlogic.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 15 May 1998, John Birrell wrote: > 2. Ports which contain sources that might build on more than one > architecture, but some sort of support (like devices) is not > available for some reason. [no comment save this] > 3. Binary ports that only work on one architecture. NetBSD and OpenBSD each have a bsd.port.mk variable # ONLY_FOR_ARCHS- If a port only makes sense to certain architectures, this # is a list containing the names for them. It is checked # against the predefined ${MACHINE} value No reason we can't steal it. :) -- Outnumbered? Maybe. Outspoken? Never! tIM...HOEk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message