From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 25 06:59:10 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F35E625B; Sun, 25 May 2014 06:59:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46BFA2472; Sun, 25 May 2014 06:59:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.21] (unknown [130.255.19.191]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89666435C7; Sun, 25 May 2014 01:58:46 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <53819495.9010906@marino.st> Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 08:58:29 +0200 From: John Marino Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Perry Hutchison , bapt@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is staging a port really this simple? References: <524CE820.5060003@missouri.edu> <20131003061511.GF85314@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <538179d9.ERL3ZKEnk4pQKKib%perryh@pluto.rain.com> In-Reply-To: <538179d9.ERL3ZKEnk4pQKKib%perryh@pluto.rain.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 06:59:10 -0000 On 5/25/2014 07:04, Perry Hutchison wrote: > Some months ago, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> ... if you need any help staging your ports I can provide reviews. > > I have a couple of ports that need staging support added, and I've > finally managed to find time to look into it. Having read such > documentation as I could easily find using Google, and looked at > the ports, I am feeling as if I must have overlooked something > -- because the only changes that seem to be needed are to insert > ${STAGEDIR} into a few lines in the Makefiles. > > Granted these are not complex ports, but if it really is this easy > I have to wonder what all the uproar has been about :) > > What-all have I missed? > You didn't miss much -- except adding the man page to the pkg-plist and removing the MAN* definitions from the makefile. When the "install" target is defined, staging is normally pretty simple to do. John