Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 07:33:58 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru> Cc: "svn-ports-head@freebsd.org" <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-ports-all@freebsd.org" <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, Jason Helfman <jgh@FreeBSD.org>, Boris Samorodov <bsam@freebsd.org>, "ports-committers@freebsd.org" <ports-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r319003 - head/mail/imaptools Message-ID: <20130525073358.GA60755@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <51A0654C.4010204@passap.ru> References: <201305241819.r4OIJ4H8030590@svn.freebsd.org> <CAMuy=%2BiSbFNWJee3oJ33i7%2BngTKCqeqJdaHKjo87-SuNkZoM5w@mail.gmail.com> <51A0654C.4010204@passap.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 11:16:28AM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> Thanks for suggestion, I did not realise that it may be employed
> here! However after some investigation it seems it's not worth,
> since a single reinplace command should be replaced by for knobs:
> USES+SHEBANG_FILES as well as WRKSRC and NO_BUILD:
It might still be better...
> +WRKSRC= ${WRKDIR}
Shouldn't NO_WRKSUBDIR be used instead?
> +USES= shebangfix
> +SHEBANG_FILES= *.pl
> +NO_BUILD= yes
Having NO_BUILD looks correct: there is, in fact, nothing gets built here.
Hence, it helps to understand port logic better, I think.
Makefile should stary mostly declarative, not imperative. If one can get
away from manually coding some target actions, and offload the grunt work
to bpm, doesn't it make more sense to just go for it? :-)
./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130525073358.GA60755>