Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 21:28:34 +0000 (UTC) From: Marcin Wisnicki <mwisnicki+freebsd@gmail.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] NO_INSTALL in meta-ports considered harmful Message-ID: <gu7gu2$gtl$1@ger.gmane.org> References: <gu718o$v5l$1@ger.gmane.org> <4ad871310905101008n73d26145h3d81914925aab965@mail.gmail.com> <gu77mu$lmi$1@ger.gmane.org> <4ad871310905101222g63867982p6161ff0ddd1b6850@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 10 May 2009 15:22:04 -0400, Glen Barber wrote: > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Marcin Wisnicki > <mwisnicki+freebsd@gmail.com> wrote: >> They will be installed since they are run dependencies. >> >>From what I can tell (from several metaports) -- they, themselves, are > not installed. The ports defined in the metaport are installed. That's the point. The metaports should be installed as well (reasons given in my original mail). > There is no source code for, using your example, CUPS[1]. CUPS (in the > FreeBSD ports tree) is, for lack of a better explanation, a pointer to > which specific ports you need to have in order to get a fully operation > CUPS system running. Looking at the Makefile for print/cups [2] you can > see the dependencies and that CUPS is not actually built (which in > definition is what makes this a metaport). I know this. The proper way to make a metaport is to: 1. use only RUN_DEPENDS 2. set NO_BUILD 3. do *NOT* set NO_INSTALL 4. provide empty do-install target There are several metaports that get it right, like for example x11/gnome2: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/x11/gnome2/Makefile?rev=1.155
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?gu7gu2$gtl$1>