Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 16:00:45 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposed patch to inform users of fetchindex Message-ID: <20050131155701.U1177@ync.qbhto.arg> In-Reply-To: <41FEC61F.6000309@FreeBSD.org> References: <20050131143802.X1177@ync.qbhto.arg> <41FEC61F.6000309@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>> I can't help but think that the majority of users try to build their own
>> index because they don't know that there is a better alternative. What
>> would y'all think of the following patch?
>
> I like the warning, but I don't think that making a new target is really a
> good thing. I think that printing the warning message at the beginning of a
> 'make index' is better than having 'make index' not result in any INDEX
> whatsoever.
Another way to approach it would be:
Index: Makefile
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/pcvs/ports/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.90
diff -u -r1.90 Makefile
--- Makefile 17 Dec 2004 11:23:22 -0000 1.90
+++ Makefile 31 Jan 2005 23:59:53 -0000
@@ -66,8 +66,12 @@
.include <bsd.port.subdir.mk>
index:
+.if !defined(I_REALLY_MEAN_IT)
+ @${ECHO} 'Warning'
+.else
@rm -f ${.CURDIR}/${INDEXFILE}
@cd ${.CURDIR} && make ${.CURDIR}/${INDEXFILE}
+.endif
fetchindex:
@cd ${.CURDIR} && ${FETCHINDEX} ${MASTER_SITE_INDEX}/${INDEXFILE}.bz2 && bunzip2 -f ${INDEXFILE}.bz2 && chmod a+r ${INDEXFILE}
Or similar ... It's the general concept I want to get across here, the
implementation is a SMOP.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050131155701.U1177>