Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 14:42:47 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Fernando_Herrero_Carr=C3=B3n?= <elferdo@gmail.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: math/R and slave ports guidelines Message-ID: <CAMwkeZy_eeVfBDgsWLGbQkfQ3QWgzsJuz3vOQ_ma2cb3H8iPeg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAMwkeZzLixeTB_fTSNvykiDifKNgt8u9k%2BN9wYGptz%2Ba%2ByP-mg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAMwkeZzLixeTB_fTSNvykiDifKNgt8u9k%2BN9wYGptz%2Ba%2ByP-mg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
My proposal would be that the master port offers the options to link against: none/ATLAS/openBLAS/netlib and that slave ports follow suit. Does that sound reasonable? 2016-02-13 14:40 GMT+01:00 Fernando Herrero Carr=C3=B3n <elferdo@gmail.com>= : > Hi all, > > I am working on some upgrades to the Makefile of math/R and I have found > that there are two slave ports depending on it: math/libR and > math/libRmath. Now I have some questions about how slave ports should be > handled. > > As it stands, the master port will only set some options *if* it is the > master port itself being built and not one of the slaves. For example > (math/R/Makefile:145): > > *.if !defined(LIBRMATH_SLAVEPORT)* > .if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MATLAS} > LIB_DEPENDS+=3D libatlas.so:${PORTSDIR}/math/atlas > BLAS?=3D ${LIBM} -lf77blas > LAPACK?=3D ${LIBM} -lalapack -lcblas > .else > BLAS?=3D no > LAPACK?=3D no > .endif > CONFIGURE_ARGS+=3D --with-blas=3D"${BLAS}" --with-lapack=3D"${LAPA= CK}" > .if ${BLAS} =3D=3D "no" || ${LAPACK} =3D=3D "no" > PLIST_SUB+=3D LAPACK=3D"" > .else > PLIST_SUB+=3D LAPACK=3D"@comment " > .endif > [...] > > this fragment will only try compiling against ATLAS if it is not the > math/libRmath port the one being compiled. > > In my opinion having the choice to link against > ATLAS/openBLAS/netlib/none_of_them is interesting to any maths ports. Is > there any reason why this specific slave port rejects it? Are there any > general guidelines as to how options from master ports should be handled = in > slave ports? I haven't found any specific hints in the porter's handbook. > > Having a look at editors/emacs-nox11/Makefile (emacs-nox11 is a slave to > emacs) I see the possibility of specifying OPTIONS_EXCLUDE, which seems a > more reasonable place to handle such cases. > > Any help with this will be highly appreciated. > > Best, > Fernando > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAMwkeZy_eeVfBDgsWLGbQkfQ3QWgzsJuz3vOQ_ma2cb3H8iPeg>