Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:53:55 -0500 From: Dave Glowacki <dglo@hyde.ssec.wisc.edu> To: Ernst de Haan <znerd@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: absinthe@pobox.com, Calvin Varney <calvin@varney.org>, freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Port/package guidelines (WAS: Please review: new Java Project docs) Message-ID: <200208271553.g7RFrtn26287@hyde.ssec.wisc.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:09:29 %2B0200." <200208262209.AAA07190@smtp.hccnet.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ernst de Haan wrote: > Currently a very small number of ports seems to use Ant: > > databases/postgresql-jdbc/Makefile > java/jdom/Makefile > java/jump/Makefile Also databases/mysql-jdbc-mm and java/jakarta-oro, though the latter doesn't have a BUILD_DEPENDS line for ant. I've just submitted PR ports/42086 to add the BUILD_DEPENDS line to jakarta-oro, but since the last fix I submitted for this port (ports/39112, a trivial 1 character change to fix a directory name) has been sitting in the queue for 2.5 months, I'm not optimistic about this one getting committed before the end of the year. > Initial suggestion: > > o An Ant-based port sets USE_ANT=YES which is interpreted by > bsd.java.mk. I'm assuming that this would automatically set up the BUILD_DEPENDS and ANT variables? > o Should the port come with a build.xml file or should it set some > properties that will allow us to _generate_ a build.xml file for > it? So far I've only used build.xml files which were provided with ports. Would a generated build.xml file override the supplied build.xml file (which would seem to throw away a lot of work already done by the original author) or would it only be generated if no build.xml file existed? I suppose a third option would be to have the generated build.xml file call the original build.xml file, but in that case it would make more sense to have the port's Makefile call it and cut out the middleman. > o If the port comes with a build.xml file, then should it have some > default targets? Yes, in fact I'd say that port build.xml files should always support targets like 'all', 'clean', 'install', something like 'install-docs', etc. or there's not much point in having them, since every Makefile would have to supply the glue to mesh with the standard port targets. If there are standard targets, then bsd.java.mk could automatically supply the glue. > o How do we install any JAR files, source code, Javadoc API documentation, > etc in a standard manner? My ports tend to use the supplied build.xml file to build the jar file, then have the port's Makefile install the jar file(s) and javadoc itself, so they know exactly what's been installed in order to generate a decent packing list. It'd be nice if the ports-friendly build.xml could keep track of what was installed, so it could generate all or part of the packing list. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200208271553.g7RFrtn26287>