Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 11:14:16 +0200 From: Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@freebsd.org> To: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CONF class of files Message-ID: <AE55A6EA-C39F-4167-9C07-FEFDFD0FFD02@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikbF4_CifAzaAOUXYVYxyu8X3po2A@mail.gmail.com> References: <BANLkTinkhTzy9aOw0SzcQWff8p8COrVPNw@mail.gmail.com> <379A724C-4458-4E5C-81E9-CF125666E203@FreeBSD.org> <BANLkTikbF4_CifAzaAOUXYVYxyu8X3po2A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
On Jun 19, 2011, at 10:50, Chris Rees wrote:
> On 19 June 2011 09:15, Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 17, 2011, at 18:40, Chris Rees wrote:
>>> Macros are being tested for bsd.port.mk that use a new class of files,
>>> in the same vein as the BINOWN variables I have introduced CONFOWN,
>>> CONFGRP, CONFMODE and CONFDIR.
>>>
>>> Please would someone review and give an opinion on [1]?
>>
>> Shouldn't $CONFDIR be set to ${PREFIX}/etc/ instead of /etc?
>>
>> Also, if we define $CONFDIR, we should use it everywhere in bsd.*.mk where we currently use some form of */etc/* - otherwise we will get a mismatch if $CONFDIR is changed from the default.
>
> CONFDIR is for base, not ports, just like most other stuff in that
> file. Have a look at the other DIR variables.
Gah, I was confused by you initial mail mentioning bsd.port.mk.
Rereading the patch, I think it looks good. I'd love to see this go in before 9.0 as well.
Brix
--
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@FreeBSD.org>
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAk39vegACgkQv+Q4flTiePig8gCfevlUn7vuz09cqJe5D9qpE2ci
msMAnAtdeVUOsjO0sEUMBsM9cghvIzSx
=ZY1n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AE55A6EA-C39F-4167-9C07-FEFDFD0FFD02>