Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 25 Mar 1997 08:34:55 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
To:        asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Perl 
Message-ID:  <E0w9YFT-0003GJ-00@rover.village.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 Mar 1997 05:48:36 PST." <199703251348.FAA00913@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> 
References:  <199703251348.FAA00913@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>  

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199703251348.FAA00913@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> Satoshi Asami writes:
: Ok...but is it necessary to run it?  (The current perl ports don't run 
: it, right?)

I think that the current perl ports do run it.  The line that I cut
and paste was consistant between the three or four ports that I looked
at.

: Also, is it possible to just use the existing framework (CONFIGURE_*)
: to do it?  (Taking a quick look at bsd.port.mk, I see a "./" in front
: of ${CONFIGURE_SCRIPT}, that much at least has to be changed though.)

Yes.  I'd like to do that.  To be consistant, PERL_CONFIGURE would be
a better name.  I'm basically saying that we should, after

.if defined(GNU_CONFIGURE)
CONFIGURE_ARGS+=	--prefix=${PREFIX}
HAS_CONFIGURE=		yes
.endif

add

.if defined(PERL_CONFIGURE)
HAS_CONFIGURE=		yes
CONFIGURE_SCRIPT=	${PREFIX}/bin/perl Makefile.PL
.endif

And then move the 

CONFIGURE_SCRIPT?=	configure

line to after this.

:  * It doesn't detect perl5 existing all of the time.  At least that's my
:  * experience.  
: 
: Then I'm afraid there is something wrong with your system.  It's just
: a simple "which" test so it should always be found or never found (if
: you don't have /usr/local/bin in your path).

Ummm, perl *IS* in my path, but there are two problems.  First,
sometimes it is perl4.  And other times it isn't in ${PREFIX}/bin, but
some other place.  The current OpenBSD machine that is having the
problem does't have perl in /usr/local/bin.  I'm trying to compensate
by setting PREFIX to some place I can install into (I don't have root
on this machine, which makes things even ickier).  Maybe I'm confusing
multiple issues here.

:  * 		And *_DEPENDS make the whole build fail, rather than just
:  * this port, at least that's how it appeared to be acting when I've been
:  * building under OpenBSD.
: 
: There is nothing wrong with this.  If you do a top-down build without
: "-k", and one of the ports fail to build, make is supposed to stop.

I'd like some way to say that missing depends should be treated as if
the port was marked BROKEN.

:  * If I want to build the ports tree, but I don't care about any of the
:  * P5-* ports for whatever reason, I'd like to be able to disable them
:  * easily.
: 
: If you are going to build the whole ports tree, there are many ports
: that (by itself) install much more junk than all the p5-* ports
: combined. :)

True.  However, I know that all the p5-* ports are broken on OpenBSD
(at least on the system I'm doing the builds from) and I don't want
*ANY* of them to build until I corrent the problem.  I don't want to
get distracted by them until I have time to focus on the problem for a
while.  If there was an easy way to turn them all off, this would
solve that problem.

Anyway, at this point I think I'll come up with some code and propose
it and see how you feel about that.

Warner



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E0w9YFT-0003GJ-00>