From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 15 12:53:07 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6DD16A4DD; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:53:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from mx5.mail.ru (mx5.mail.ru [194.67.23.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26ACB43D6E; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:53:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from [213.148.29.33] (port=51411 helo=nexii.panopticon) by mx5.mail.ru with esmtp id 1GCyPp-000DUE-00; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:53:05 +0400 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.2]) by nexii.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A61F17046; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:52:33 +0400 (MSD) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D4A72410F; Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:53:10 +0400 (MSD) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:53:10 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: G??bor K??vesd??n Message-ID: <20060815125310.GB52489@hades.panopticon> Mail-Followup-To: G??bor K??vesd??n , Sergey Matveychuk , freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, erwin@freebsd.org References: <20060814234414.GA57035@hades.panopticon> <44E16DF6.20705@FreeBSD.org> <44E1964F.8060500@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44E1964F.8060500@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, Sergey Matveychuk Subject: Re: ATTENTION: is the way DESTDIR was introduced completely wrong? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:53:07 -0000 * G??bor K??vesd??n (gabor@FreeBSD.org) wrote: > >I agree with every your word. > I was to implement it in this way, but as I said this would require us > to change all of the *_DEPENDS lines. Erwin told me that this can't be > happen, so I was pushed to go the another way. Erwin is in portmgr, and > portmgr's word make sense in these questions... Why change _DEPENDS lines in ports while we can prepend DESTDIR where needed in bsd.port.mk? I can make the patches if needed. > >This is exactly I proposed. But I've not been heard. > You have been, but this will happen later, after an -exp run as Erwin > said. And in the opposite form. Ports that don't respect DESTDIR will be > marked. Could you point me to any information regarding this -exp? Honestly I don't get how the software can be proven working without human inspection. Ok, there can be errors on stderr. But what about GUI software? There will be messageboxes, how to detect these? Or there will be no complaints at all, software just won't work properly (i.e. a game will run with no textures/no sound etc.). We may search for paths in all files installed by port (simple grep(1) on text files, strings(1)|grep on binaries) to detect wrong paths - that's far more reliable - is that what's done? -- Best regards, Dmitry mailto:amdmi3@mail.ru