Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 15:22:04 -0400 From: Glen Barber <glen.j.barber@gmail.com> To: Marcin Wisnicki <mwisnicki+freebsd@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] NO_INSTALL in meta-ports considered harmful Message-ID: <4ad871310905101222g63867982p6161ff0ddd1b6850@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <gu77mu$lmi$1@ger.gmane.org> References: <gu718o$v5l$1@ger.gmane.org> <4ad871310905101008n73d26145h3d81914925aab965@mail.gmail.com> <gu77mu$lmi$1@ger.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Marcin Wisnicki <mwisnicki+freebsd@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 10 May 2009 13:08:56 -0400, Glen Barber wrote: > >> I'm not sure if this is the 'right answer', but NO_INSTALL allows the >> proper installation of numerous ports from one location (the meta-port). >> =A0An example of this is the misc/instant-server port (though >> unmaintained, IIRC). >> >> If you remove the NO_INSTALL line from the Makefile, 'make' thinks >> misc/instant-server should be installed, rather than the collection of >> ports it is intended to install. > > They will be installed since they are run dependencies. > >From what I can tell (from several metaports) -- they, themselves, are not installed. The ports defined in the metaport are installed. There is no source code for, using your example, CUPS[1]. CUPS (in the FreeBSD ports tree) is, for lack of a better explanation, a pointer to which specific ports you need to have in order to get a fully operation CUPS system running. Looking at the Makefile for print/cups [2] you can see the dependencies and that CUPS is not actually built (which in definition is what makes this a metaport). [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/pds.cgi?ports/print/cups [2] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/print/cups/Makefile?rev=3D1= .43 --=20 Glen Barber
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4ad871310905101222g63867982p6161ff0ddd1b6850>