Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 10:04:50 +0200 From: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@FreeBSD.org> To: Big Lebowski <spankthespam@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Ports List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Biuilding ports without Makefiles using different lang compiler Message-ID: <20130927100450.4655a59a@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> In-Reply-To: <CAHcXP%2Bee%2BZjyBH-MVG0-rTqna9qpYZ3bWVr_r9wViL2_LnC2Xw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAHcXP%2Bee%2BZjyBH-MVG0-rTqna9qpYZ3bWVr_r9wViL2_LnC2Xw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/PtFqeSYB7r9.aUVCgoIyf3U Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 23:50:41 +0200 Big Lebowski wrote: > I am working on a new port, that's a software written in Go, which doesnt > have a Makefile in sources, and I am wondering that's the right way to > write it: I could use NO_BUILD and in pre-install cdw to relevant directo= ry > and invoke compiler libary and its target, like 'go build' (using variabl= es > of course from port Makefile) that would do the job, but somehow I feel > there should be a better way. >=20 > I wonder should I write a Makefile for it and patch the sources to place = it > there, so I could just use ports mechanisms, or is there another way, or > perhaps what I am describing above is the correct way of handling that? If there's no makefile you can put build and install instructions in a do-build and do-install target in the port makefile. --Sig_/PtFqeSYB7r9.aUVCgoIyf3U Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (FreeBSD) iF4EAREKAAYFAlJFPCcACgkQfoCS2CCgtisAKQD8C8MvqZ+Rq1NOP3CatbNa3uVF t7BhnNyAKJqm2sthLm0A/0AndCRgIrgmks8IIPc1YFQ06ASd3W7uocfJu6/CrqP2 =kbCa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/PtFqeSYB7r9.aUVCgoIyf3U--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130927100450.4655a59a>