From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 27 09:02:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF35216A4CE for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:02:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from minnie.everett.org (minnie.everett.org [66.220.13.228]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C627243D2F for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:02:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from harlan@minnie.everett.org) Received: from minnie.everett.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34005482F; Mon, 27 Dec 2004 01:02:08 -0800 (PST) To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 26 Dec 2004 19:48:11 PST." <20041227034811.GB5120@xor.obsecurity.org> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 01:02:08 -0800 From: Harlan Stenn Message-Id: <20041227090208.A34005482F@minnie.everett.org> cc: Harlan Stenn cc: questions@freebsd.org cc: harlan@everett.org Subject: Re: portupgrade -P and local changes X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:02:09 -0000 I looked at pkgtools.conf, and I don't see a way to do what I want there. My goal here is to make it *easy* for somebody to update the installed ports on a machine. Even if we could use MAKE_ARGS in pkgtools.conf to try and do this that does not solve the problem I am seeing. (There is a bigger problem here - if one uses MAKE_ARGS and wraps a package tarball, one cannot subsequently tell how the package tarball was built. It makes sense then to always create a new port that contains the local mods and name it accordingly.) And it's lame to put information in pkgtools.conf that will need to be duplicated in a ports/*/Makefile.local. Looks like I get to learn ruby, huh? H -- On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 07:38:10PM -0800, Harlan Stenn wrote: > I think a fair number of people would like to see it. > > It would make it Lots Easier for people to upgrade their systems. > > There are packages where it makes lots of sense to use the prebuilt ones. > > Now that I think the only feature I want is for it to "don't fetch if > there is a Makefile.local" I'll see if I can code it up and submit it. > > Or is there a better way to handle building a port with local modifications > besides using a Makefile.local file? There's an alternative way, which is to use pkgtools.conf (see the sample file). You might be able to achieve what you want that way.