Date: Fri, 7 Apr 1995 16:39:09 -0700 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=) To: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com Cc: ports@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: Portsmeister! Message-ID: <199504072339.QAA08754@forgery.CS.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <22243.797294272@freefall.cdrom.com> (jkh@freefall.cdrom.com)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Well, I think it would be a lot easier if you first explained to me * how you intended on making post-* work. It's not trivial, given the * way Make dependencies only "chain" in one direction! Or have you * simply overlooked something I missed? It's hard to say, which is why * I'd like to see your proposal before saying anything more! :-) Well, I was going to copy the "post-configure" thing into the build target (right before the touch) and do a 's/configure/build/g' on it. Why doesn't that work? I guess I'm overlooking something, huh? ;) * > This sounds good, but we have to assess what preparations people * > actually need. It would be great if we can run it on an already * > "install"ed and "clean"ed directory too, in which case depending it on * > install is not a good idea. * * I think it will end up being port-dependant and there won't be a damn * thing you can do about it. :-) Well, but we can at least export a macro that does checks like LIB_DEPENDS and EXEC_DEPENDS for the demo writer's convenience.... * The harmonizing with pkg_*? That would be very nice, yes. I'll send out another message about this later. * Yes, well, since you're working on the GUIDELINES _anyway_.. :-) Hey, I thought I punted the GUIDELINES and you fair-caught it! No? ;) Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504072339.QAA08754>