Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 14 Jul 1995 15:04:07 -0700
From:      asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
To:        cstruble@vt.edu
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ports/616: make install target in ports ignores NO_PACKAGE
Message-ID:  <199507142204.PAA29276@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <199507141830.OAA00672@quirk.com> (cstruble@vt.edu)

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
 * Yes, but what if I don't want the information registered? Or for example,
 * I'm testing a port build and install without packaging information
 * available? The make complains and dies with an error. Earlier versions
 * of the bsd.port.mk files honored the NO_PACKAGE for installs. At least,
 * it did for pre-2.0.5 SNAPS (I distinctly remember doing this for a 
 * few ports I grabbed off the FTP site because the package commands failed).

That was considered a mistake.  I didn't know there was somebody who
liked the old behavior. ;)

 * Should there be a new variable? I don't think it's necessary, but at least
 * give me some way of telling the system I don't want package information
 * installed.

Well, we can have variables for everything but for this particular
one, I don't see the need to add yet another variable to the already
congested bsd.port.mk.  You can do "make -i install" if you are just
testing, I think that's good enough.

Remember, not having pkg/* files is not allowed for any port
(NO_PACKAGE or not), so those ports are broken and have to be fixed.
And for testing broken ports, we usually recommend "make -i". :)

Satoshi



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199507142204.PAA29276>