Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:04:19 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@FreeBSD.org> To: david fries <djf@gmx.ch> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Question about pkg-plist Message-ID: <20100131220419.52d53c65@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <1264966073.2975.17.camel@sphinx.doesntexist.org> References: <1264966073.2975.17.camel@sphinx.doesntexist.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/qoRc86bwtnbFxBI95RaCYrR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 20:27:53 +0100 david fries <djf@gmx.ch> wrote: > Hello everybody >=20 > I'm currently working on a tiny little port. It consists of a single > binary and an accompanying LICENSE file. When I ran genplist, it > generated this in pkg-plist.new: >=20 > bin/mybinary > %%PORTDOCS%%%%DOCSDIR%%/LICENSE > %%PORTDOCS%%@dirrm %%DOCSDIR%% >=20 > Simple enough. However, I also know that the LICENSE file will also be > installed if NOPORTDOCS has been defined. I thought maybe I should > write something like this.=20 >=20 > bin/mybinary > %%DOCSDIR%%/LICENSE > @dirrm %%DOCSDIR%% If you install the LICENCE file depending on NOPORTDOCS, the you should keep the first variant; if not, the second. First is what you should do. --=20 IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" FreeBSD committer -> itetcu@FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B --Sig_/qoRc86bwtnbFxBI95RaCYrR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAktl4kQACgkQJ7GIuiH/oeWBOACePojy4vWuPHLD7AMcBRdhx809 x8oAnRIk+N33Q66koGO1qmqenXYj2epb =Czdt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/qoRc86bwtnbFxBI95RaCYrR--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100131220419.52d53c65>