Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu,  5 Oct 1995 17:30:24 +0300 (MSK)
From:      =?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= (aka Andrey A. Chernov, Black Mage) <ache@astral.msk.su>
To:        ache@freefall.freebsd.org, Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu>
Cc:        CVS-commiters@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-share@freefall.freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/share/mk bsd.port.mk
Message-ID:  <Dn0m-Sm4i2@ache.dialup.demos.ru>
In-Reply-To: <199510050429.VAA07365@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>; from Satoshi Asami at Wed, 4 Oct 1995 21:29:46 -0700
References:  <199510050429.VAA07365@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199510050429.VAA07365@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> Satoshi
    Asami writes:

> *   Modified:    share/mk  bsd.port.mk
> *   Log:
> *   Add CONFIGURE_ENV: pass this environment to configure script.
> *   Allows pre-set some variables to eliminate wrong tests

>I've got only six questions about this change:

>(1) Which port required this?

Currently ncftp2 (it _always_ require it, not with latest update only,
but I don't pay much attention to it).
It always can't find getmaxyx  which is really present.
Fixing it at configure script level (submitting patch back
to author assumed) involved to complex and deep work, I don't
want to spent time for it.

There was several other ports which I have problems too (I don't
remebrer right now, grep usage needed)
which I forced to hack configure scripts directly, now
I can do it without source modifications.

>(2) Couldn't it have been done as a special target in the port
>    Makefile instead of in a file that affects all the other ports?

It can't be done as special target.
It not affects other ports if you don't set CONFIGURE_ENV
variable directly.

>(3) If not, should this go int 2.1R?

It will be nice, if goes.

>(4) If yes, this is the list of ports I already built with the "old"
>    bsd.port.mk, can you please go check and see if they will all
>    build and package fine with the modified bsd.port.mk?

They all build with new bsd.port.mk.
It not affects any ports.
If you simple look at my change in bsd.port.mk (2 lines affected), you'll
have less questions about it.

-- 
Andrey A. Chernov        : And I rest so composedly,  /Now, in my bed,
ache@astral.msk.su       : That any beholder  /Might fancy me dead -
FidoNet: 2:5020/230.3    : Might start at beholding me,  /Thinking me dead.
RELCOM Team,FreeBSD Team :         E.A.Poe         From "For Annie" 1849



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Dn0m-Sm4i2>