Date: Sat, 22 Apr 1995 14:12:00 -0700 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=) To: jmz@freefall.cdrom.com Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: XFree86 Makefile Message-ID: <199504222112.OAA24823@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199504221543.IAA25517@freefall.cdrom.com> (message from Jean-Marc Zucconi on Sat, 22 Apr 1995 08:43:31 -0700)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* BTW: what about my suggestion to move @${MAKE} ${.MAKEFLAGS} fake-pkg
* out of the do-install target? (If not I will have to make another pass
* through the print directory, since I missed this feature...)
I'm not sure what to do about this, I sent out a question to "ports"
but got no response. Maybe I'll ask again. (See CC: )
What do people think about this? I'm in favor of leaving it in
do-install, for the sake of orthogonality (all the "main" targets look
exactly the same now). But I understand Jean-Marc's point that we
shouldn't let porters worry about internal details.
At any rate you don't have to make another pass yet, we'll have to
come up with a conclusion first. If we decide to move it into
do-install, I'll have to make another pass into the Makefiles I
fixed. :)
* Another (minor?) point: the package directory corresponding to
* 'ports/print' is called 'package/printing'. This is not consistent.
It's not only print, many of the category names are longer versions of
directory names. It's Jordan's doing, but I think it's okay. :)
Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504222112.OAA24823>