From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Aug 11 20:14:18 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from neptune.psn.net (neptune.psn.net [207.211.58.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E21114CC0 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 1999 20:14:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from will@shadow.blackdawn.com) Received: from 5042-243.008.popsite.net ([209.224.140.243] helo=shadow.blackdawn.com) by neptune.psn.net with esmtp (PSN Internet Service 2.12 #3) for ports@FreeBSD.ORG id 11ElJh-0000au-00; Wed, 11 Aug 1999 20:14:10 -0700 Received: (from will@localhost) by shadow.blackdawn.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id XAA57892 for ports@FreeBSD.ORG; Wed, 11 Aug 1999 23:14:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from will) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3 [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 23:14:05 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: Will Andrews From: Will Andrews To: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: bsd.port.mk deficiency? Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi fellow porters. With my recent submissions of the irc/scrollz and devel/qtk, I'm pondering whether bsd.port.mk needs another mechanism - namely, one where the port is marked as having a compressed distfile that does not contain a tarball, but rather the port's only file. Since I am not (yet) fully able to understand all the inner workings of bsd.port.mk, I can't offer a patch that would work for sure, only a method. If the distfile contains no tarball, the porter can define NO_TAR to mean the file to which the uncompressed distfile should be redirected. EXTRACT_AFTER_ARGS in particular would be redefined as: "> ${NO_TAR}". For example, if my port's distfile goes by the name abc-1.24.bz2, I would set NO_TAR= abc-1.24 The result: bsd.port.mk redefines EXTRACT_AFTER_ARGS as above, makes the ${WRKSRC} to equal ${WRKDIR}/${DISTNAME} (i.e., makes that dir in addition to the ${WRKDIR}.), and extracts the file to ${WRKSRC}/${NO_TAR}. It would then be up to the porter to put in an additional target (do-install) that indicates whether this file is a script or a program (or even a data file.), through ${INSTALL_*}. The only problem I foresee with the method I've stated above is where a port has multiple distfiles. I am currently at a loss to offer a solution for that, but I'm sure somebody else can figure that one out. :-) Sorry if I sounded like I was rambling here. I tend to do that when I'm confused.. };> -- Will Andrews To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message