Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:50:05 -0500 (EST) From: mi@video-collage.com To: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com> Cc: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/12739: New port: AT&T's DjVu Netscape plug-in Message-ID: <200003282350.SAA04257@xxx.video-collage.com> In-Reply-To: <20000328173006.N69223@lovett.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 28 Mar, Ade Lovett wrote:
= I believe I already mentioned that the site was moved to www.djvu.com
Oops, yes. You are right!
= > = I'd strongly recommend installing devel/portlint and using it to clean
= > = things up before submission.
= >
= > I used it:
=
= Looks like you missed some flags.. as a rule, I tend to use:
=
= portlint -abcNv
=
= which gives a better idea of any issues.
Indeed... Live and learn... Well, the MOZILLA_HOME may be set to
anything, so, I guess, there is no way out of it, other then hardcoding
the ${LOCALBASE}/lib/netscape instead... May be, I should -- if someone
is savvy enough to use different netscapes, he/she can hand-taylor
things anyway...
= > I put the "TAR?=tar" and "LN?=ln" in there on purpose, because I
= > tested this port on an old 2.2.8 machine with old bsd.port.mk. The
= > two other warnings are bogus too -- one is there because of quotes
= > around ${MOZILLA_HOME} (what if it has spaces in it?) and the other
= > is because RUN_DEPENDS lists ${MOZILLA_HOME}.
=
= My (possibly incorrect) understanding is that support for both 2.x and
= aout 3.x has ceased.
If it takes so little, why not leave it there?
= > I'm sure I'm not. With the NO_CDROM/NO_PACKAGE we are not even a
= > party of the license agreement... This way the port is not
= > interactive, which is good, is not it?...
=
= My understanding of the license agreement is that it needs to be
= presented to, and accepted by, the end user, before proceeding.
Yes, but we don't have to go out of our way to enforce that -- again, we
are not a party the agreement -- it is between user and AT&T. As a
courtesy to the latter, we tell the user about it, but, strictly
speaking, I don't think we are required to do that.
= Usual disclaimers about not being a lawyer apply, but the fact that
= you have a bunch of comments in there suggest that you thought about
= this enough to put them in. If it's not a problem, why have the
= comments at all, since most people won't be reading the Makefile
= anyway.
You don't have to read the Makefile, that's the beauty of this method I
discovered for myself :) Since the lines are tab-indented, make treats
them as shell commands and expands all the variables. Shell echoes
them, but, since they are comments, does nothing else, thus avoiding
invocations of /bin/echo... And the Makefile remains prettier -- without
those ugly @${ECHO} prefixes.
If you think, I should hardcode the MOZILLA_HOME in there -- let me
know, and I'll upload a new version. Otherwise, please, fix the
MASTER_SITE and consider committing the thing. It's been in the queue
for too long :(
Yours,
-mi
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003282350.SAA04257>