From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Jul 11 19:41:35 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92FBC37B400; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:41:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.22.40]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE54C43E64; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 19:41:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g6C2fUcA196866; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 22:41:31 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20020706220511.GA88651@scoobysnax.jaded.net> <3D27A296.D58FB4B4@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 22:41:30 -0400 To: Wes Peters , Dan Moschuk From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: Package system flaws? Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.3 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 10:00 PM -0400 7/7/02, Garance A Drosihn wrote: >I think we try to stuff too much information into the name of a >port, and we try to do too much to shoehorn all ports-processing >into standard makefile variables and standard make-cmd processing. To explain this a bit more, we sometimes get into a problem when portAA needs portBB, and you: cd /usr/ports/*/portAA make -> make sees it needs to make portBB -> it does a cd /usr/ports/*/portBB -> and does a 'make' there, but it still has a whatever make variables had been set for portAA, which you might *not* want to have set when making portBB. I know I've hit this, but I can't remember the specifics, and I know I have not hit it often. Using portupgrade also probably reduces the chance of this happening. If I had more spare time, what I'd like to try my hand at is to redo how all the port interactions are described in the Makefile. Instead of doing that with makefiles and make-variables, do it as makefile comments, and then have a separate program (not make itself) figure out what other ports should be made based on that information in the comments in the makefile. Make would then run that program as the first step towards making the port, and run that program again as the first step towards 'make install' of the port. The way I described that it might sound a little hair-brained, but I think it could be an improvement if done right. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message