Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 19:16:23 +0100 From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: New bsd.*.mk changes Message-ID: <400D7077.30009@fillmore-labs.com> In-Reply-To: <1074621945.757.63.camel@gyros> References: <1074590694.85583.20.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <400D2939.5090203@fillmore-labs.com> <1074617147.757.16.camel@gyros> <20040120171315.GH94636@FreeBSD.org> <1074619795.757.43.camel@gyros> <400D68A1.4030501@fillmore-labs.com> <1074620919.757.51.camel@gyros> <20040120175136.GC3365@toxic.magnesium.net> <400D6D8F.7010708@fillmore-labs.com> <1074621945.757.63.camel@gyros>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 13:03, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
>
>>Adam Weinberger wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>(01.20.2004 @ 1248 PST): Joe Marcus Clarke said, in 3.9K: <<
>>>>>Can we at least have
>>>>>
>>>>>OPTIONSNAME?=${PKGNAMEPREFIX}${PORTNAME}
>>>>>
>>>>>here? It makes sense for all the localized ports, perl, ruby, python, linux
>>>>>and others.
>>>>
>>>>That makes sense...maybe having the whole trifecta is a good idea, too:
>>>>${PKGNAMEPREFIX}${PORTNAME}${PKGNAMESUFFIX}
>>>>
>>>>And what about UNIQUENAME instead of OPTIONSNAME? This way, it could be
>>>>used for other purposes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>end of "Re: HEADS UP: New bsd.*.mk changes" from Joe Marcus Clarke <<
>>>
>>>
>>>If all you're going for is a unique identifier for each port, this is
>>>guaranteed unique:
>>>
>>>${.CURDIR:S@${PORTSDIR}@@:S@/@_@g}
>>>
>>>x11_gnome2, etc.
>>
>>Sorry to bring it up again, LATEST_LINK is designed to do what we want, it
>>has just a stupid name...
>>
>>Look at
>> <http://bento.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-packages-5-latest/Latest/>;
>>all packages in one directory, no collisions, version independend. It even
>>survives renaming / category changes.
>
> Except not every port creates a LATEST_LINK.
Not every port creates PKGLATESTFILE (${PKGLATESTREPOSITORY}/${LATEST_LINK}${PKG_SUFX}).
Every port sets the variable LATEST_LINK (by default to
${PKGBASE}=${PKGNAMEPREFIX}${PORTNAME}${PKGNAMESUFFIX}), and ports that need to
override it with something suitable (openldap, apache). Only the ports that build
no packages (like the jdk ports) don't care and have the same LATEST_LINK.
I totally agree that nobody want to use a variable called 'LATEST_LINK' used for that
purpose, but, hey, it's just a name. If we use something like
OPTIONSNAME?=${LATEST_LINK}
we have to use an workaround only for the port that build no packages, the rest should
be automagically right. All the work of thinking of an unique name has already been done
for a lot of ports.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?400D7077.30009>