From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 23 14:40:33 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E42D106564A; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 14:40:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhelfman@e-e.com) Received: from mail.dw.redsrci.com (mail.pub.dw.redsrci.com [72.29.183.251]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66B228FC0A; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 14:40:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.dw.redsrci.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.dw.redsrci.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20D0A6F1ECD; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 07:40:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=e-e.com; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:mime-version :user-agent:from:from:subject:subject:date:date:references :in-reply-to:message-id:received:received:received; s=ee; t= 1332513632; x=1334328032; bh=7ngnCug2B2ZQx7OGSWwjtzKUVZEYzFDbPBy 8o4Vn5lE=; b=j/uqBuIp4NXsDwyJRunkhsxV7EkATVkfzft653lFZBdWZ5w+V16 YUcvLum6t5mNPvYp91WfvnWcFQ2fpWEevp9Vwq2ny5Q3F5/Bm3Fhm/Sk7sm5h232 HFTDPRYKWkdgZZ8me65iz9Z4utAVieRcBSa5dCNwtX/galNobe1rbHpY= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at experts-exchange.com Received: from mail.dw.redsrci.com ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.dw.redsrci.com (mail.dw.redsrci.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hMGtHZQUnybq; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 07:40:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.experts-exchange.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.dw.redsrci.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA9B66F1EC8; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 07:40:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 76.251.118.198 (SquirrelMail authenticated user jhelfman) by mail.experts-exchange.com with HTTP; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 07:40:32 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <4F6C8893.6040005@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 07:40:32 -0700 From: "Jason Helfman" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.20 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Michael Scheidell Subject: Re: why :: in ports makefile ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 14:40:33 -0000 >> I have never seen this before, and I wanted to know what it does. >> >> diff -ruN /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile >> /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile >> --- /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin.org/Makefile 2012-02-08 00:17:28.000000000 >> +0900 >> +++ /tmp/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile 2012-03-06 08:55:28.445163638 >> +0900 >> @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ >> .endif >> @${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/spamc/libspamc.h ${PREFIX}/include >> >> -post-install: >> +post-install:: >> .if defined (WITH_SPAMC) >> @${STRIP_CMD} ${PREFIX}/bin/spamc >> .endif >> >> (this patch was sent to me by the maintainer of ja-p5-Mail-SpamAssassin. >> I suggested that he change his port to a slave port so that it would be >> easier to follow, and he has done a good job. >> >> I just wanted to know what the differences are in the port Makefile >> between a ':' and a '::' >> >> Does this have to do with slave port(ish) things? does this force it to >> execute? what is it? >> >> Pardon my ignorance, I have just never seen this before in any port I >> have >> maintained, or worked on. >> >> (reference this PR for context) >> >> >> >> >> > > from make manapage > (http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=make&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+9.0-RELEASE&arch=default&format=html): > > :: If no sources are specified, the target is always re-created. > Otherwise, a target is considered out-of-date if any of its sources > has been modified more recently than the target. Sources for a > target do not accumulate over dependency lines when this operator is > used. The target will not be removed if make is interrupted. > > This is typically used in ports for pre-everything target, but have never > seen it on post-install. I don't see why the :: is necessary, either, as > ':' should do in this case. > > -jgh Unless, of course, the maintainer wants to override the master target of the same name. I believe this may be the intention. -jgh