[Bug 287992] security/py-pwntools: opt us out of PATH pollution, solves conflict with sysutils/moreutils

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=287992

--- Comment #10 from Chad Jacob Milios <milios@ccsys.com> ---
(In reply to Emanuel Haupt from comment #9)

fabulous. thanks for the fast feedback. hope your Independence Day was off the
hook

+.include <bsd.port.pre.mk>
 PYDISTUTILS_INSTALLARGS+=      --only-use-pwn-command
-.include <bsd.port.mk>
+.include <bsd.port.post.mk>

that's all we need to change (whtspc to taste). i should have seen it sooner
:smh:

PYDISTUTILS_INSTALLARGS is a foot-gun. i'll file a PR later today with a tweak
to its instructional comment and a little bit of housekeeping around the ports
tree

2 ports use it right. x11/xpra = KING. textproc/py-creole = primo exemplar
simplicia
2 ports use it non-wrong. databases/py-berkeleydb & security/py-python-nss

10 ports blew their foot off, failing to pass --prefix and missing out on
whatever
   joys -O1 bring (confirmed: -O0 gets implied)
4  ports abuse it [for fear of touching a simpler knob which works well but was
   "deprecated" ten millennia ago after enjoying a tenure of just 8 months]
1  port sends it straight to /dev/null to no detriment
1  port is so complex the jury is still out, but it seems A.OK

FreeBSD ports/Mk does [only] so well to empower a "declarative style" that we
occasionally forget it's just procedures all the way down to a topological sort
in bmake along with all the wonders of lazy evaluation

i'm learning more about Python this weekend than i ever wanted to know (but
learning ports/Mk is a gift that keeps giving and never disappoints)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.