Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 12:22:30 -0400 From: Brandon Fosdick <bfoz@glue.umd.edu> To: "Chris D. Faulhaber" <jedgar@fxp.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: make clean in /usr/ports Message-ID: <39942846.59268DA3@glue.umd.edu> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0008090712140.2042-100000@earth.causticlabs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Chris D. Faulhaber" wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Brandon Fosdick wrote: > > > Why do I have to specify -DNOCLEANDEPENDS when doing a 'make clean' in > > /usr/ports? Why would anyone want to clean dependencies when cleaning the entire > > ports tree? Isn't that kinda redundant? > > Why would anyone 'make clean' in /usr/ports in the first > place? Dependencies are cleaned automatically so that when a port is > installed, everything that may have been built is cleaned. I've never seen this behavior, and I just checked it with a fresh ports tree. > > I can already hear the response..."Send a patch...". Have you actually looked at > > the makefiles? I have a better chance of decphering the Iliad written in > > cuneiform. > > > > Hmmm, if you *need* to 'make clean' in /usr/ports, how about just adding > "NOCLEANDEPENDS=yes" to /usr/ports/Makefile ? I hadn't thought of that. However, it seems to me that I shouldn't have had too. Whether you need to clean the entire ports tree or not, its dumb to have the system automatically assume that you want to clean dependecies for the whole tree. Granted, the current system is workable and specifying NOCLEANDEPENDS isn't difficult, but the engineer in me thinks that it could, and should, be better. Is there some way to have /usr/ports/Makefile automatically define NOCLEANDEPENDS iff the current directory is /usr/ports? -Brandon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?39942846.59268DA3>