.include "files/somefile" before .include <bsd.port.pre.mk>

[Ion-Mihai Tetcu]

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:56:44 +0300
Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu at people.tecnik93.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:41:36 +0200
> Mathieu Arnold <mat at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
> > +-Le 26/08/2004 23:32 +0300, Ion-Mihai Tetcu a dit :
> > | Hi,
> > | 
> > | 
> > | Is it legal to include a file from files _before_ including
> > | bsd.port.pre.mk ?
> > | 
> > | I need to obtain some long lists ( of DISTFILES and slave ports) and
> > | having them in a separate file would make maintenance much more easy.
> > | 
> > | The problem I see is that .CURDIR is not defined; does this break
> > | something ?
> > 
> > .CURDIR is an internal make variable, it's not defined by bsd.*.mk :
> > 
> > 
> > mat $ cat Makefile
> > test:
> >         @echo ${.CURDIR}
> > mat $ make test
> > /home/mat
> 
> slave-ports-list contains:
> SLAVE_PORTS= slave_port 1 \
> slave_port2 \
> .... etc ........
> 
> ..............
> .include "${.CURDIR}/files/slave-ports-list"
> .for port in ${SLAVE_PORTS:O}
> OPTIONS+= ${port} .......      
> .endfor
> .include <bsd.port.pre.mk>
> ............
> 
> on make it search slave-port-list  in /
> Same (and expected) if I put ${FILESDIR}/slave-ports-list"

Uh, sorry, it's working with ${.CURDIR}/files (and, of course not with
FILESDIR), but portlint -CN complain:
WARN: Makefile: possible direct use of "files" found. if so, use ${FILESDIR} instead.

And I want do do the same for the DISTFILES.

So I'm asking if it's OK to do so (e.g. portlint point of view) as I
don't want write it all again if it doesn't obey style.

> > What problem are you trying to solve ?
> 
> Trying to have some infrastructure to easily maintain a port with about
> 1000 distfiles by breaking it in slave ports and having a metaport to
> install the small ones.

And I have some scripts hat automate the a large part of the process.


-- 
IOnut
Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"