Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 19:44:33 +0000 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports-mgmt/portconf , ports-mgmt/portmaster and make args Message-ID: <AANLkTikLdH86vk1O=zzUgDRhOm=xkd9GqcvWK=Z8zh_M@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4D1F7DEA.9020006@FreeBSD.org> References: <AANLkTimCd6tRqPWHj%2BTOWTmB8rM7uVq%2BQVeYdcZz2VJc@mail.gmail.com> <4D1F7DEA.9020006@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1/1/11, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 12/31/2010 18:40, b. f. wrote:
>
>> You don't need to go to those lengths. You could just add a
>> command-line switch, or a check for a cookie (.buildme or .nopkg, say)
>> in the corresponding PORT_DBDIR subdirector(y|ies), or both, to allow
>> the user to indicate to portmaster that it should always build the
>> port(s) in question, even if -P is used.
>
> My preferences are for something that it's possible for other port tool
> authors to use, and something that requires the minimal necessary steps
> for the user. Since the OP is already editing knobs in ports.conf, and
> since IMO either ports.conf or make.conf are easier to transport between
> systems I think I'll give Matthew's idea a try first. :)
Whatever works, as long as it is not specific to ports-mgmt/portconf,
because many users may not use that port and yet still want to avoid
the use of packages for certain ports. Note that various Makefiles
(Makefile.{inc,local,${ARCH},${OPSYS}, and ${ARCH}-${OPSYS}}) can also
hold per-port defines that may have to be accounted for, and that
NO_PACKAGE may preclude your use of 'make package' with -g in
portmaster (at least without some workaround like FORCE_PACKAGE).
b.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikLdH86vk1O=zzUgDRhOm=xkd9GqcvWK=Z8zh_M>