Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 21:24:20 +0100 From: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> To: ports@freebsd.org Cc: ohauer@freebsd.org Subject: Call for testers -- CONF_FILES variable Message-ID: <BANLkTikvMU2dK=aN=hFgxA8wfvUitmfbRA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dear all, I've rewritten the CONF_FILES handling after talking to bapt@, and I've done away with the colon-separated tuples -- they're overcomplicated. The result is something like MAN and PORTDOCS (indeed most of the code is stolen from PORTDOCS). This means that shell globs, filenames and directories are specified in CONF_FILES, but the sample file is installed in the Makefile as .pkgconf. Examples for MailScanner [1] show how it can replace huge trees of config files, and for portscout [2] shows how it is used for just one file. Look at how much has been removed from the MailScanner plist and pkg-*install.in files -- there are three screens of unused functions that could also be chopped out now too! I'm asking people to (if they want) try out the new variable, and let me know what they like and don't like about it. Since bapt@ is sort of sponsoring this and isn't back for ~ two weeks it won't make it in before then at least, but some testing and feedback would be fantastic! http://people.freebsd.org/~crees/patches/bsd-port-mk-conf-files-plist-only-pkgconf.diff Chris [1] http://people.freebsd.org/~crees/patches/mailscanner-conf-files.diff [2] http://people.freebsd.org/~crees/patches/portscout-conf-files.diff P.S. Before people complain about the pkgconf suffix, that is for compatibility with pkgng, and no, .sample files are not going to be supported -- they'll need to be installed as .pkgconf. Sorry.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTikvMU2dK=aN=hFgxA8wfvUitmfbRA>