Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2000 02:47:41 +0900 From: suzukis@file.phys.tohoku.ac.jp To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How to develop a port/package without root previlege? Message-ID: <20000205174741.6894.qmail@file.phys.tohoku.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: Issei Suzuki 's message of Sun, 06 Feb 2000 01:40:43 %2B0900<20000206014043K.issei@issei.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Set ${DESTDIR}, and all files are installed to
>the subdirectory of ${DESTDIR}.
Thanks, but it's not what I'm asking for, because
it's to make a package from "correctly-port"ed
softwares without bothering other directories.
Also ${BINOWN} and ${BINGRP} should be corrected
to avoid the requests of root previlege.
By the way, could you let me know an example of
"correctly-port"ed software? I want to refer its
Makefile.
>Note:
> Some ports ignore ${DESTDIR}, and these should be fixed.
Sounds important. They are some? I'm afraid many...
Talking my experience... the port for bison-1.27. Its own Makefile
(created via configure) supports ${prefix} and ${DESTDIR}, in fact,
when typing "gmake install prefix=`pwd`/tmp" under
/usr/ports/devel/bison/work/bison-1.27,
gmake does not try install into /usr/local.
But typing "make package DESTDIR=`pwd`/tmp" at /usr/ports/devel/bison,
pmake tries to install bison into /usr/local. Setting ${DESTDIR} in
/usr/ports/devel/bison, the result is same behaviour.
I'm wondering why ports can be worse than original Makefile...?
Most "ports" developer works with root previlege, and does not care?
# If my system is already violated and
# the behaviour I found was its result,
# I'm sorry for bothering you.
suzuki
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?20000205174741.6894.qmail>