From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Sep 25 3:45:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from ipcard.iptcom.net (ipcard.iptcom.net [212.9.224.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39D9C37B416; Tue, 25 Sep 2001 03:45:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vega.vega.com (h203.229.dialup.iptcom.net [212.9.229.203]) by ipcard.iptcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA34325; Tue, 25 Sep 2001 13:42:55 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (big_brother.vega.com [192.168.1.1]) by vega.vega.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f8PAg2A04998; Tue, 25 Sep 2001 13:42:02 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <3BB05FD4.3E235748@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 13:43:32 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Vega International Capital X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,uk,ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Will Andrews Cc: lioux@uol.com.br, FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org, pat@databits.net, fenner@FreeBSD.org, kris@FreeBSD.org, green@FreeBSD.org, knu@FreeBSD.org, julian@FreeBSD.org, petef@FreeBSD.org, cwasser@v-wave.com, sjh-cl@horan.net.au, john_m_cooper@yahoo.com, matt@ipperformance.com Subject: Re: review plz MASTER_SITES_n (ala OpenBSD) patch for bsd.port.mk References: <20010923055224.A93855@exxodus.fedaykin.here> <20010923133030.K69123@curie.physics.purdue.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Will Andrews wrote: > On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 03:25:05PM +0400, Maxim Sobolev (sobomax@mail.ru) wrote: > > Thank you for a great work, it is really step in the right direction. > > Yeah! It is awesome! > I've reviewed the diff and I believe it is very well done. I'd > like to test a final version of this patch plus patches to the > various ports in my bento tree (mainly KDE and its dependneices) > and see how it goes. Any objections to this method of testing? > If someone else wants to add other ports for the sole purpose of > testing this patch, I'll do that too. > > > I have not reviewed the implementation yet, but the writeup is really > > interesting and well thought out. At the same time, I am not very happy > > with the resulting Makefile bloat, and have a quick idea, which may or > > may not be a better way out: > > I agree. > > > Why not in addition to postfixes in DISTFILES introduce the same > > postfixes in MASTER_SITES and MASTER_SITE_SUBDIR? This would allow > > to avoid introducing MASTER_SITES_foo, turning your example below > > into: > > I like this: > > > MASTER_SITES= http://master7/:n \ > > http://master1/:t http://master2/:t http://master3/%SUBDIR%/:t \ > > http://master4/:y http://master5/:y http://master6/%SUBDIR%/:y \ > > http://master8/:p > > DISTFILES= file1:t file2:y file3:n file4:o:p > > MASTER_SITE_SUBDIR= subdir:t subdir_test:y > > But, there's a small problem here. I believe ':' is a valid URI > character, and I believe _some_ places have actually used this > character. But I am not sure. Would it be possible to use a > different character for the delimiter? It would not a big problem, because in MASTER_SITES presence of postfix means absence of trailing `/' (hence it is easy to sort it out), while possibility to find `:' in the MASTER_SITE_SUBDIR is close to zero. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message