From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 1 20:20:12 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0AE116A402 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 20:20:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rizzo@icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B82FB13C471 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 20:20:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rizzo@icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.11/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l11KKBEW084792; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:20:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.11/8.12.3/Submit) id l11KKBSB084791; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:20:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:20:11 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <20070201122011.B84181@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20070201111727.B83474@xorpc.icir.org> <20070201192051.GA72926@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070201113720.D83474@xorpc.icir.org> <20070201194417.GA73296@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20070201194417.GA73296@xor.obsecurity.org>; from kris@obsecurity.org on Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 02:44:17PM -0500 Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /usr/local/share/mk ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:20:12 -0000 On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 02:44:17PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:37:20AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote: ... > > Now, this may well be a one-of-a-kind case calling for an ad-hoc > > solution, but if all we need is accept to use ${PREFIX}/share/mk > > for third-party .mk files, this seems a better way to handle > > the problem. > > After >10 years you are apparently the first person to want such a > feature, so this suggests the application is limited :) possibly, yes. Or maybe there were other applications solved with other hacks - e.g. (randomly browsing in /usr/share/mk), do the following really belong there: bsd.info.mk - building GNU Info hypertext system bsd.snmpmod.mk - building modules for the SNMP daemon bsnmpd They don't seem to be a part of the 'base' system unlike all the others. In a sense this is also related to my other question on a 'recursive install' command. We don't have one, but then there are several ports with a huge number of 'INSTALL' calls in them: ./graphics/libx3dtk/Makefile : 464 YUCK!!! ./irc/psybnc/Makefile : 252 ./editors/setedit/Makefile : 79 ./www/ssserver/Makefile : 59 ./games/macopix/Makefile : 43 ./x11-toolkits/open-motif/Makefile : 34 ./www/awstats/Makefile : 29 ./www/validator/Makefile : 28 ./mail/mailscanner/Makefile : 28 ./ftp/bsdftpd-ssl/Makefile : 28 ... There are 262 entries with 10 or more 'INSTALL' in them; several use tricks like this .for f in dot.mosaic-hotlist-default @${INSTALL_DATA} ${FILESDIR}/${f} ${SAMPLEDIR} .endfor So... there is not a recursive INSTALL, maybe nobody asked for it, but certainly we have a lot of replicated constructs in the ports' makefiles, and some port maintainers with a lot of patience :) cheers luigi