Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 06:20:16 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: "Daniel M. Kurry" <gh@over-yonder.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Thinking about PORTCOMMENTS Message-ID: <p05200f11b9f6930c2e59@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <20021111232402.GA2153@over-yonder.net> References: <p05200f10b9f5e5d795ff@[128.113.24.47]> <20021111232402.GA2153@over-yonder.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 5:24 PM -0600 11/11/02, Daniel M. Kurry wrote: >On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 06:08:34PM -0500 I heard the voice of >Garance A Drosihn, and lo! it spake thus: > >[...] > >> Why should we keep trying to stuff more and more things into 'make' >> variables in the Makefile for a port? I understand the advantage >> of having fewer files, so we want to put more information into the >> Makefile, but does that information really have to be done as >> 'make' variables? How about if we did it as some kind of fake-XML? > >Is there any reason /not/ to put them in make variables? To avoid the quoting problem... Don't forget, the change is temporarily backed out because of several problems that popped up when trying to apply it to all ports! If the change had gone in successfully, I would not have brought up the fake-xml idea until I had some working example of what I am thinking of. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05200f11b9f6930c2e59>