Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 12:30:57 -0500 From: Naram Qashat <cyberbotx@cyberbotx.com> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Using another port Makefile's values without being a slave port? Message-ID: <549C49D1.2090807@cyberbotx.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi everyone, I've been working on a major update to the print/fontforge port. Fontforge is set up in such a way that it has no option to disable usage of freetype, but it does have an option of using freetype's source code to build freetype's internal debugger into fontforge. Because of this, fontforge needs freetype's distfile when that option is enabled. Currently, to do the above, the version, distfile, and master sites of freetype have been copied into fontforge's Makefile. However, I am wondering if it is possible to utilize the distfile and master sites from the print/freetype2 port directly instead of hardcoding them into fontforge's port. If this is feasible, I know that one way to accomplish this would be using shell commands (to basically do 'make -VDISTFILES' and 'make -VMASTER_SITES' on the freetype port), but I'm wondering if those values can be utilized without using shell commands. Because fontforge is only a consumer of freetype and not related to it, it wouldn't be appropriate to have fontforge being a slave port of freetype. If it is better to keep things as they are instead, I'd like to know. I'm just looking for a way to make it easier to handle freetype being updated in the future without having to worry about it in fontforge. The only reason I can think of against changing how it is done is because of freetype's tarball being listed in fontforge's distfiles, and that would need updating every time there is a freetype update anyways. Thanks, Naram Qashat
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?549C49D1.2090807>