Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 16:08:30 -0600 From: Robin Schoonover <end@endif.cjb.net> To: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports with no pkg-plist files Message-ID: <20041016160830.34115d03@zork> In-Reply-To: <200410162312.35392.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> References: <20041016135618.00711a35@dolphin.local.net> <20041016141935.2d77ebea@dolphin.local.net> <20041016143203.7d20298a@dolphin.local.net> <200410162312.35392.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 23:12:32 +0200 Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> wrote: > On Saturday 16 October 2004 21:32, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > > > Just as a footnote: I personally would prefer to keep the pkg-plist > > files around. They greatly simplify the task of determining what > > files are provided by an uninstalled port (I use a script I wrote > > that takes advantage of these files for just this purpose, in fact). > > Seems like your script needs a rewrite then. pkg-plist isn't the > canonical way to provide the packing list, it's just the most simple > one. Some ports require something less simple, for some even having a > separate file is overkill. > I've noticed that the only way to make sure you get a plist is to do a "make install" and then look the installed +CONTENTS. You need to build the port because some ports don't know what their plist is until they've built themselves (www/firefox being one). You need to install because some ports generate the plist as part of the install step (databases/php-sqlrelay, devel/colorer and many others do it this way...) -- Robin Schoonover (aka End) # # The older a man gets, the farther he had to walk to school as a boy. #
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041016160830.34115d03>