Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 19:46:25 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, jkh@freebsd.org, brent.welch@sun.com, n1epo4tl@ibmmail.com Subject: Re: ports/mail/exmh Message-ID: <3441.822368785@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 23 Jan 1996 03:41:33 %2B0100." <199601230241.DAA25868@vector.jhs.local>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -------- > > FreeBSD Ports people > CC Jordan, brent.welch@sun.com (EXMH author), > Stuart.Arnold n1epo4tl@ibmmail.com > > Below is a new port (wrapper): ports/mail/exmh > ( EXMH is a very nice X-Windows front end to the mail/mh package, > > ( This is a more polished version of the one I did in December, But still untested.. :-) root@time-> make >> exmh-1.6.5.tar.gz doesn't seem to exist on this system. >> Attempting to fetch from ftp://ftp.aud.alcatel.com/tcl. /tclexmh-1.6.5.tar.gz: No such file. The MASTER_SITES field needs a trailing `/', which in this case doesn't really matter anyway since it points to the wrong directory! :-) I believe that Alcatel has always put code like this in the `code' subdirectory, where one will indeed find the exmh package. The BUILD_DEPENDS are also entirely wrong, and force gratuitous repacks of both the TCL and Tk ports (hint - you have to match shared library names properly, as is done in other ports). Oh yeah, they're also not even supposed to be there - we use LIB_DEPENDS and EXEC_DEPENDS instead now, remember? The entire ports tree switched over quite some time back. Anyway, if you manage to get past all of that, you'll fall over in the build anyway here: ===> Building for exmh-1.6.5 make: cannot open Makefile. *** Error code 2 You forgot to set NO_BUILD since everything for exmh is really done in the install script. Also, don't ignore the return status from wish - it's important! You don't want to run `post-install' if the install falls over, do you? That'd look pretty funky. > There are likely a few things Satoshi may want to rearrange to conform with > bsd.port.mk, but the port is functional, & includes all the packages stuff. No, actually this port is almost a textbook example of how to do almost everything completely wrong! Kids, do NOT try this at home! :-) I think you need to go back over the ports collection again and learn from some of the examples. This port is in absolutely no shape to commit, much less use. Oh, and I'm actually be somewhat surprised if Brent were genuinely interested in any of this - we're talking about FreeBSD's `ports encapsulation' of his product, after all, and that's something likely to be of interest only to other FreeBSD ports weenies. Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3441.822368785>