Ports with no pkg-plist files

[Robin Schoonover]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 23:12:32 +0200
Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock at gmx.net> wrote:
> On Saturday 16 October 2004 21:32, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
> 
> > Just as a footnote: I personally would prefer to keep the pkg-plist
> > files around.  They greatly simplify the task of determining what
> > files are provided by an uninstalled port (I use a script I wrote
> > that takes advantage of these files for just this purpose, in fact).
> 
> Seems like your script needs a rewrite then. pkg-plist isn't the
> canonical way to provide the packing list, it's just the most simple
> one. Some ports require something less simple, for some even having a
> separate file is overkill.
> 

I've noticed that the only way to make sure you get a plist is to do a
"make install" and then look the installed +CONTENTS. You need to
build the port because some ports don't know what their plist is until
they've built themselves (www/firefox being one).  You need to install
because some ports generate the plist as part of the install step
(databases/php-sqlrelay, devel/colorer and many others do it this
way...)

-- 
Robin Schoonover (aka End)
#
# The older a man gets, the farther he had to walk to school as a boy.
#