Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 23:36:14 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@FreeBSD.org> To: Zhihao Yuan <lichray@gmail.com> Cc: Wen Heping <wen@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, portmgr@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk Message-ID: <20111115233614.22d3984e@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <CAGsORuAz--GVpiEkgnYJccqCESx2CJ12peFDk_JetfFj6kQqGw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAGsORuAz--GVpiEkgnYJccqCESx2CJ12peFDk_JetfFj6kQqGw@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --]
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:02:38 -0600
Zhihao Yuan <lichray@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The PR which updates all pure-* ports was passed to portmgr for a long
> time, since it seem that to put a
>
> .if defined(USE_PURE)
> .include "${PORTSDIR}/Mk/bsd.pure.mk"
> .endif
>
> In bsd.port.mk may a be better choice. Though Pure is not as popular
> as some languages like PHP or Python, but it does and it will have
> more ports than like Go. To include bsd.pure.mk under Mk/ can lower 2
> lines in ~20 ports (or I have to leave it under lang/pure's private
> directory).
How many pure ports are there ATM?
--
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
"Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> itetcu@FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAk7C21kACgkQJ7GIuiH/oeXXjQCbBGpxir5v+H6M650cHLscdzVL
N6oAnjMq1d254zeUG9RB+QEiNbIB4169
=5amI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111115233614.22d3984e>