Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 14:16:09 -0600 From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Optionally depending on one of two ports (or none of them) Message-ID: <20070224201609.GC4960@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <45E08E3D.8060104@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <20070222141301.007fee4f@localhost> <45DDA117.3050508@FreeBSD.org> <20070224163229.062bd234@localhost> <45E06810.1070704@FreeBSD.org> <45E08E3D.8060104@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 07:13:01PM +0000, Matthew Seaman wrote: > Why not do it this way? > > HAVE_TOR_DEVEL!= if pkg_info -I tor-devel-\* >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then echo YES; fi The problem with this approach is that you couple another shell invocation into 'make index'. As long as they are in individual ports, it's ok, but when we get them in the infrastructure, that's when things slow down. No, I don't have an alternative proposal. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070224201609.GC4960>