From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Apr 26 15:23:36 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from rutger.owt.com (rutger.owt.com [204.118.6.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5916737B405; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 15:23:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owt.com (owt-207-41-94-232.owt.com [207.41.94.232]) by rutger.owt.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA12902; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 15:23:20 -0700 Message-ID: <3CC9D357.9010105@owt.com> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 15:23:19 -0700 From: Kent Stewart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us, es-mx MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Maxime Henrion Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, Doug Barton Subject: Re: patch to have make clean not recurse in ${PORTSDIR} References: <20020424224454.GM88736@elvis.mu.org> <20020424191430.W62277-100000@zoot.corp.yahoo.com> <20020426204935.GA42922@elvis.mu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Maxime Henrion wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: > >>On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Maxime Henrion wrote: >> >> >>>Currently, if you do a ``make clean'' in /usr/ports, it will recurse >>>through each port's dependencies and clean them too. >>> >> This has been discussed at great length on various lists. The two >>answers to your question are, A) You can already do what you want to do, >>with an option that allows you NOT to do it if for some reason you >>actually WANT to repetitively clean dependencies, >> > > I never said my patch was bringing new functionality, the point is to > change a default which doesn't make any sense IMO. However, it has a > side effect of breaking the case where you actually want to clean > dependencies repetitively when in /usr/ports, as mentioned in my mail > already. I also said that I can change it so that it's still possible > to do it, if I was given a good reason to do so. > > >> and B) The fastest way >>to clean up your ports tree is not to use make at all, it's: >> >>find /usr/ports -type d -name work -exec rm -r {} \; >> > > I'm well aware of that, and I use something similar often. You could > also use -maxdepth and -mindepth so that it's even better, as somone > already noted. You could also use portsclean or whatever, this is not > the point at all. This patch is _not_ a performance patch, it's a patch > to have "make clean" in /usr/ports behave as expected, some could say > intelligently. > > Are these two reasons all what was given when this has been discussed > previously ? Honestly, they doesn't make sense to me. > I think that as long as a make will automatically install all of the b-deps and r-deps of a port the default should be what it is. If you do not clean what you have generated, people will have a shock from all of the code that suddenly appeared and caught them off guard. I have an alias that I run instead of "make clean". It stands for make_do_not_clean depends and is alias makednc make -DNOCLEANDEPENDS clean Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message