Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 23:29:46 -0800 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r332668 - in head/security: . pkesh Message-ID: <5279EFEA.2070607@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20131106072833.GG60770@FreeBSD.org> References: <201311040605.rA465DDm028738@svn.freebsd.org> <20131106071044.GF60770@FreeBSD.org> <5279ED27.8050107@freebsd.org> <20131106072833.GG60770@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/05/13 23:28, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 11:17:59PM -0800, Colin Percival wrote:
>> On 11/05/13 23:10, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>>>> +PLIST_FILES= bin/pkesh \
>>>> + %%PORTDOCS%%%%DOCSDIR%%/README
>>>> +PLIST_DIRS= %%DOCSDIR%%
>>>
>>> Using PORTDOCS=README would allow you to 1) get tid of eye-tearing %%'s in
>>> PLIST_FILES and drop PLIST_DIRS.
>>
>> Huh. I was confused by the [staging] wiki page since it says "Just add
>> the right %%PORTDOCS%% as prefix in your pkg-plist...".
>
> Yes, if you prefer to list docs explicitly in pkg-list (real file), you
> have to use so-called "plist subs", %%FOOBAR%%. When using PLIST_FILES
> or PORTDOCS (using them often makes, esp. for short plists), you do not
> need to do all the dancing with subs, it is done automagically for you.
>
> That said,
>
> PLIST_FILES= bin/pkesh
> PORTDOCS= README
>
> is all it takes.
Awesome! Please make the documentation less confusing. ;-)
>>>> +do-install:
>>>> + ${INSTALL_SCRIPT} ${WRKSRC}/pkesh.sh ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX}/bin/pkesh
>>>> +
>>>> +post-install:
>>>> + ${MKDIR} ${STAGEDIR}${DOCSDIR}
>>>> + ${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/README ${STAGEDIR}${DOCSDIR}
>>>
>>> You could've simply merged all commands in do-install target. No need for
>>> two of them, really. :-)
>>
>> The aforementioned wiki page says "Directory creation should remain in the
>> post-install: target" so that's what I did...
>
> It mentions post-install because usually do-install simply calls install
> target (via ${INSTALL_TARGET}) provided by the upstream build system. So,
> using post-install is more generic, yes. However, in cases when you have
> to roll your own do-install, there is no any need to split the two.
Good to know. I'll go ahead and fix all of these.
--
Colin Percival
Security Officer Emeritus, FreeBSD | The power to serve
Founder, Tarsnap | www.tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoid
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5279EFEA.2070607>