Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 13:08:16 -0800 (PST) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> To: mark@grondar.za (Mark Murray) Cc: green@FreeBSD.org (Brian Fundakowski Feldman), jkh@zippy.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard), sumikawa@FreeBSD.org (Munechika SUMIKAWA), cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/openssh Makefile ports/security/openssh/patches patch-ad Message-ID: <200001182108.NAA49771@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <200001182054.e0IKsLw00815@gratis.grondar.za> from Mark Murray at "Jan 18, 2000 10:54:21 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > MAINTAINER= green@FreeBSD.org # Backward compatibility
> > # And then a comma/space-delimited new one:
> > MAINTAINERS= green@FreeBSD.org, sumikawa@FreeBSD.org
This is make(1), make(1) tokens are seperated by whitespace, not commas,
correct make syntax is:
MAINTAINERS= green@FreeBSD.org sumikawa@FreeBSD.org
Anything trying to deal with this outside of make is broken, unless a
specific make export of this data is written in a .mk or Makefile.
maintainers:
echo $MAINTAINERS
is the simplest of export... :-) If you need the comma's that is left as
an excercise for the reader :-)
> > That would only possibly break bad scripting (but not correct scripting),
> > and it would provide a mechanism for more MAINTAINERS. My ideal choice
> > for separator tokens would be ", ^I". Wouldn't this be a clean and
> > compatible solution? Nothing special about the ${MAINTAINERS} variable
> > would even have to be implemented until it's convenient.
>
> What is MAINTAINER[S] used for? That needs to be addressed, not
> Makefile syntax.
I agree, Makefile syntax is already clearly defined by make(1).
--
Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200001182108.NAA49771>