From owner-cvs-all Sat Feb 28 14:56:49 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA29347 for cvs-all-outgoing; Sat, 28 Feb 1998 14:56:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from picnic.mat.net (picnic.mat.net [206.246.122.117]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA29313; Sat, 28 Feb 1998 14:56:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from chuckr@glue.umd.edu) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost) by picnic.mat.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA20229; Sat, 28 Feb 1998 17:55:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 1998 17:55:27 -0500 (EST) From: Chuck Robey X-Sender: chuckr@localhost To: "David E. O'Brien" cc: Satoshi Asami , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/print/c2ps Makefile In-Reply-To: <19980228124306.44353@nuxi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk On Sat, 28 Feb 1998, David E. O'Brien wrote: > > > Good point by Chuck. Maybe we should keep the current a2ps port as the > > > "guts" of the port, and add two shell ports, being a2ps-a4 and > > > a2ps-letter. Might be less confusion for someone that doens't use the > > > ports collection often. > > > > David, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that, I might or might not > > agree. > ... > > Some points made by Tim are valid, I think ... PAPERSIZE is, I think > > all will agree, a commonly enough used variable to where handling by > > bsd.port.mk is reasonable, > > My points should be taken in a context where we don't change bsd.port.mk. > Tim's sugguestions are even better and superseed mine. > > > Tim, you brought up the idea of doing it in bsd.port.mk. Any more > > thoughts? Does anyone else think the cookie notion stinks, or how else > > would you handle packaging? > > Acutally I kinda like the idea of hacking the ports to look for a common > file that declares the prefered papersize. This means the same binary > works everywhere. Of course we could argue what the default should be > if that file is absent... :) Yeah, but how about the rest of the problem, ie., are there to be two (or more??) packages per port for ports that have USES_PAPERSIZE defined? At least the idea of doing it with a dropped cookie file removes the need for the per port cookie, and detecting a file during make is very easy to do. And how about naming conventions? You can see what my own position is by seeing what I did in a2ps, but I'm not particularly unwilling to use other's obviously good ideas. One last thing is that, if we _do_ decide on PAPERSIZE, then I thin we ought to ask Jordan to include such a thing in installation setup, and move the file into, perhaps, /etc or /etc/make.conf (as a defined var). > > -- > -- David (obrien@NUXI.ucdavis.edu -or- obrien@FreeBSD.org) > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@glue.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message