Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:40:32 -0400 From: Parv <parv@pair.com> To: horio shoichi <bugsgrief@bugsgrief.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: make package-recursive Message-ID: <20040824024032.GA3298@moo.holy.cow> In-Reply-To: <20040823.231846.7ede85c647d0486f.10.0.3.20@bugsgrief.net> References: <20040822035742.GA13803@thai-aec.org> <200408231014.25298.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20040822035742.GA13803@thai-aec.org> <20040822152625.GA32816@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040823025952.GA14519@thai-aec.org> <20040823.231846.7ede85c647d0486f.10.0.3.20@bugsgrief.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
in message <20040823.231846.7ede85c647d0486f.10.0.3.20@bugsgrief.net>, wrote horio shoichi thusly... > > On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:59:52 +0700 "User &" > <pirat@access.inet.co.th> wrote: > > > there should some way to tell make that if ports have been made > > package, the next time that ports should not have been made > > again in the make package-recursive from some other ports. Concur. > Unfortunately, no. Change CFLAGS and remake, change some of make > options and remake, ... They give (for the most part) single same > package name. So, package-recursive is useful, rather not wasteful, only if a port depends on previously un-packaged ports. > This problem (no straightforward way to indicate what exactly the > outcome is) is inherent even in compilations (or file naming > conventions we have). Since make package has undergone build > process, and doesn't know if it is being repackaged with the same > set of files, it probably took the safest path, which is the right > thing, I guess. How about use of digest checksum(s) stored in a port's file to compare w/ that of port's package before start of package-ing? If package name is different or the checksums don't match (say, different options, CFLAGS & such), package should be built. - Parv --
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040824024032.GA3298>