Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 15:39:06 -0400 From: Sahil Tandon <sahil@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Opinions sought on location of bsd.octave.mk Message-ID: <20110703193906.GA4329@magic.hamla.org> In-Reply-To: <4E10BB64.9010904@missouri.edu> References: <4E10BB64.9010904@missouri.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2011-07-03 at 13:56:36 -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: > I am the maintainer of the octave-forge ports. These all use a file > called bsd.octave.mk. > > Currently this is located in Mk. But I have noticed that many ports > have their bsd.*.mk files in one of their ports. For example, > bsd.mesalib.mk is in graphics/libGL. > > What is accepted opinion on this? Should I move bsd.octave.mk to > math/octave-forge-base? As you note above, Mk scripts exist in various locations, so there appears to be no consensus. However, I personally agree with the sentiment in the (somewhat dated) Wiki: http://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsToDo#head-3834d3f3c000f64175eaac2e490a8e76f6a5a244 > If you think it should be moved, please tell me how strong your view > is. I am told that it requires quite a bit of effort to perform this > change, because CVS has to track all these changes. Unless there are strong *functional* motivations for making the change, why bother? Of course I may be missing some other nuance, but just my 2c since you asked for it. :-) -- Sahil Tandon <sahil@FreeBSD.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110703193906.GA4329>