ports need a uniq identifier, do you have any suggestion?

[Matthew Seaman]

On 11/06/2012 17:05, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 04:48:58PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>> On 11/06/2012 16:37, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>>> This patch does the trick, I'm now running a script with that patch on to
>>>>> discovers all the uniquename names which are not really uniq
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> Bapt
>>>
>>> Here is the patch :) http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/realuniq.diff
>>
>> Aren't you going to initialise PKGUNIQUENAMESUFFIX anywhere?

> No need except ports willing to have a custom PKGNAMEPREFIX but still wanted to
> have a custom prefix anyway.
> 
> like 
> PKGNAMEPREFIX=	${PYTHON_PKGNAMEPREFIX}
> PKGUNIQUEPREFIX=	py-
> 
> which is not mandatory but can help avoiding UNIQUENAME collision

Not PREFIX --- SUFFIX.  You have:

UNIQUENAME?=	${PKGUNIQUENAMEPREFIX}${PORTNAME}${PKGUNIQUENAMESUFFIX}
                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

or is this part of some cunning plan to do with sub-ports?

	Cheers,

	Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                   7 Priory Courtyard
                                                  Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey     Ramsgate
JID: matthew at infracaninophile.co.uk               Kent, CT11 9PW



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 267 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20120611/e2b5f574/signature.pgp