Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 11:37:20 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /usr/local/share/mk ? Message-ID: <20070201113720.D83474@xorpc.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <20070201192051.GA72926@xor.obsecurity.org>; from kris@obsecurity.org on Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 02:20:51PM -0500 References: <20070201111727.B83474@xorpc.icir.org> <20070201192051.GA72926@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 02:20:51PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:17:27AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > I have a port (the one mentioned in my previous msg)
> > which needs to install its own make's include file,
> > bsd.linux_kmod.mk , and I thought that there was
> > a system-wide place such as ${PREFIX}/share/mk
> > where the port could install the file in the first place,
> > and where make would look for it by default.
> >
> > But apparently i was wrong on both things...
> > Now maybe the extra search path can be set with some
> > system-wide option in /etc/make.conf (through .PATH ?)
> > but then the problem to settle on one a name
> > for /usr/local/share/mk remains...
>
> You're right that there is no support for this. Can you explain why
> you need it?
The thing i am working on is an adaptation layer to build linux
device drivers on FreeBSD:
http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/FreeBSD/linux_bsd_kld.html
When you want to adapt a linux driver, all you should do is grab the
linux sources, write a suitable Makefile.kld like this (this is a
real, working example!)
.PATH: ${.CURDIR} # useless in this case
# sources for the linux driver
SRCS= ov511.c
KMOD=ov511 # module name
KLINPATH=../linux_compat
.include <${KLINPATH}/bsd.linux_kmod.mk>
and just do 'make -f Makefile.kld depend all"
If bsd.linux_kmod.mk goes into a central place i'd rather not
have to remember to set KLINPATH but just write
.include <bsd.linux_kmod.mk>
Now, this may well be a one-of-a-kind case calling for an ad-hoc
solution, but if all we need is accept to use ${PREFIX}/share/mk
for third-party .mk files, this seems a better way to handle
the problem.
In term of port's backward compatibilty, the extra .PATH or -I
could be supplied by the files in /usr/ports/Mk which people
are expected to update anyways, right ?
cheers
luigi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070201113720.D83474>