Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 25 Jul 1997 18:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Doug White <dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu>
To:        Marco Molteni <molter@logic.it>
Cc:        questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   RE: Apache and Ports Policies in General
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.970725183840.1325D-100000@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970724211222.679A-100000@dumbwinter.ecomotor.it>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 24 Jul 1997, Marco Molteni wrote:

> The following happened to me with more than a port:
> 
> What I like about ports is that they take care of many things you could 
> not know, eg a particular flag to pass to the compiler.
> 
> What I don't like is that _they_ choose all the options in the 
> application Makefile.
> 
> I'd like something like:
> 1. make patch from freebsd Makefile
> 2. let _me_ edit the patched application Makefile
> 2. make install from freebsd Makefile

Then do so:

$ make patch

[ builds until FreeBSD patches applied ]

$ vi work/app/Makefile

[ hack as appropriate ]

$ make install

[ picks up where it left off, building & installing ]

Yeah, the pre-set options bit is sometimes a pain, but sometimes makes
some installs go much faster since you don't have to figure out someone
else's twisted options selection mechanism.

Doug White                              | University of Oregon  
Internet:  dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu    | Residence Networking Assistant
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite    | Computer Science Major
Spam routed to /dev/null by Procmail    | Death to Cyberpromo




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970725183840.1325D-100000>