[RFC] NO_INSTALL in meta-ports considered harmful
glen.j.barber at gmail.com
Sun May 10 19:22:06 UTC 2009
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Marcin Wisnicki
<mwisnicki+freebsd at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 May 2009 13:08:56 -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
>> I'm not sure if this is the 'right answer', but NO_INSTALL allows the
>> proper installation of numerous ports from one location (the meta-port).
>> An example of this is the misc/instant-server port (though
>> unmaintained, IIRC).
>> If you remove the NO_INSTALL line from the Makefile, 'make' thinks
>> misc/instant-server should be installed, rather than the collection of
>> ports it is intended to install.
> They will be installed since they are run dependencies.
>From what I can tell (from several metaports) -- they, themselves, are
not installed. The ports defined in the metaport are installed.
There is no source code for, using your example, CUPS. CUPS (in
the FreeBSD ports tree) is, for lack of a better explanation, a
pointer to which specific ports you need to have in order to get a
fully operation CUPS system running. Looking at the Makefile for
print/cups  you can see the dependencies and that CUPS is not
actually built (which in definition is what makes this a metaport).
More information about the freebsd-ports