From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 24 02:11:07 2004 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 54C9F16A4CF for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 02:11:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from postman.arcor.de (postman4.arcor-online.net [151.189.0.154]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B993B43D2F for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 02:11:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com) Received: from fillmore.dyndns.org (port-212-202-51-138.reverse.qsc.de [212.202.51.138]) (authenticated bits=0)i1OAB4Ua016162 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:11:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from [172.16.0.2] (helo=fillmore-labs.com) by fillmore.dyndns.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1AvZWo-0002zs-DO; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:11:02 +0100 Message-ID: <403B2336.1030607@fillmore-labs.com> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:11:02 +0100 From: Oliver Eikemeier Organization: Fillmore Labs GmbH - http://www.fillmore-labs.com/ MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Linimon References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9 cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: how to determine whether a port is a slave port? 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: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 10:11:07 -0000 Mark Linimon wrote: > One of the things that I would like to have available for the > database in my ports monitoring code is an indication of whether > or not a port is a slave port. The Porter's Handbook recommends > that the MASTERDIR makevar be used to establish that, but does > not make it clear whether its use is mandatory or not. However, > there are over 300 ports that do not seem to use this convention. > Most seem to use the "${.CURDIR}/.." convention, although a few > seem to use PORTSDIR directly. > > So, without wanting to start a bikeshed, are these just remnants > of a time before MASTERDIR was introduced? Is there a consensus > on how slave ports ought to be handled? Since FreshPorts is having problems with that too, I suggest that a port is a slave port if and only if MASTERDIR is set, and to let us fix the other ports. That would make it easier for portlint too. Concerning ${.CURDIR}/../.. vs. ${PORTSDIR} I'm undecided. Whats the problem with having both? -Oliver