From owner-freebsd-ports Wed May 6 13:25:31 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA13378 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Wed, 6 May 1998 13:25:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from hwcn.org (ac199@james.hwcn.org [199.212.94.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA13267 for ; Wed, 6 May 1998 13:25:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hoek@hwcn.org) Received: from localhost (ac199@localhost) by hwcn.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA00040; Wed, 6 May 1998 16:19:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 16:19:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek To: Chuck Robey cc: Studded , FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How-to question for port with no makefile In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 5 May 1998, Chuck Robey wrote: > Thinking about it, maybe you're right. I don't like to touch the > do-build, but maybe that's wrong. Normally I don't either, on the theory that something valueable may someday be added to do-whatever and be generic in nature, but since you're defining NO_BUILD, it only seems to complicate the Makefile by using a less-known variable. Besides that, I don't understand why pre-build even gets run when NO_BUILD is defined, and I don't like to depend on things I don't understand. :) [I assume pre-build still gets run, that is... I haven't actually tried it and am merely trusting your message :] -- Outnumbered? Maybe. Outspoken? Never! tIM...HOEk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message