Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:34:30 -0700 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: avoiding build dependency on docbook, etc. in new port Message-ID: <d873d5be0906171834m38f1fbbfm15763d0ad65bb726@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Greg Larkin wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >Charlie Kester wrote: >> On Wed 17 Jun 2009 at 13:24:32 PDT Greg Larkin wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> Charlie Kester wrote: >>>> I'm porting some software that has a build dependency on docbook2man in >>>> order to generate its manpages from .docbook files. >>>> >>>> Testing the port in tinderbox takes a long time, most of it because of >>>> the need to build the docbook infrastructure. It seems a shame to use >>>> all that CPU time and install all those packages just to get ready to >>>> convert some manpages. >>>> What's the preferred approach in cases like this? Should I keep the >>>> build dependency on docbook2man et al, or should I put pregenerated >>>> copies of the manpages in the files directory of the port? If they are too bulky for files/, you could always compress the manpages and add them via something like: .if !defined(NO_INSTALL_MANPAGES) DISTFILES+= thisportsmanpages.tar.gz .endif ... adding the appropriate target to install them, after placing thisportsmanpages.tar.gz on the FreeBSD or project servers. <snip> > >To me, that doesn't seem like a lot compared to the 100+ I was dealing >with before. But if it's still too many to deal with, Gabor's >suggestion might be better. As an example of the more economical approach that I think Gabor was suggesting, and which also respects NO_INSTALL_MANPAGES, see how pgj@ handled the manpage for devel/cppcheck (incl. files/patch-Makefile ). b.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d873d5be0906171834m38f1fbbfm15763d0ad65bb726>