Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:54:30 +0200 (CEST) From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/39606: Updated port: audio/lame (3.92) Message-ID: <200207141254.g6ECsUxQ097775@Magelan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20020714122659.GF35142@gits.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14 Jul, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
>> Do we really need vorbis support in LAME? The support was intended to
>> have a command line utility at a time where vorbis hadn't a good command
>> line utility.
>
> don't know, but since the code may support it, I left the choice
> to users. in other words, I hate incomplete ports... but, if you
> want to get rid of vorbis support, no problem.
I think we should at least make it off by default...
>> >> +USE_GMAKE= yes
>>
>> It doesn't neet gmake.
>
> as a general rule, I always add USE_GMAKE in conjunction of
> GNU_CONFIGURE because, sometimes, not everything is build
> w/ a legacy make. I already got this issue w/ some ports
> (don't remember they names), so, I prefer to prevent this
> as a side rule.
The actual automake does a good job in this case. I only had once
problems without gmake. I can assure you that LAME builds with our make
successfully (I'm responsible for the auto* stuff in LAME).
>> >> +install-la:
>> >> + @${INSTALL_SCRIPT} ${WRKSRC}/libmp3lame/libmp3lame.la ${PREFIX}/lib
>>
>> We don't need the .la file.
>
> well, I'm just doing what's other ports do.
Only ports which depend on the new libtool do this. We try to not
install the .la files.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
0 and 1. Now what could be so hard about that?
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net
GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200207141254.g6ECsUxQ097775>