[patch] PH tells crap about GMAKE (Was: Re: svn commit: r340018 - head/textproc/scew)

[Alexey Dokuchaev]

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:50:21AM +0100, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> On 2014-Jan-17, 09:35, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > If possible, particular make(1) implementation should not be referenced in
> > port's Makefile.  If you need to call "correct" make(1), use ${MAKE_CMD},
> > which would be correctly set to "gmake" in this case of yours (per USES=
> > gmake).
> 
> That makes sense. What about updating [section] 6.4.2 of the porter's
> handbook?

Indeed, this section needs some love.  Even more, I think it tells something
that is not true: "GMAKE [variables contains] The full path for gmake if it
is not in the PATH."

GMAKE is defined in Mk/bsd.commands.mk, and equals to simply "gmake".  It
is one of the rare cases when absolute (or relative to ${LOCALBASE}) path
is not used.  I did not observe any indication of some PATH inspection to
conditionally set GMAKE variable under /usr/ports/Mk.

I also think that Table 6.1 which consists of two rows and columns is, hm,
ridicule, I guess. :)  IMHO it should be removed.

Please consider attached patch.  It is not a polished gem, and most likely
would need a review and wordsmithing from doc@ guys.

While here I've also standardized the spelling of "okay", and fixed couple
of grammar nits.  These changes are not related to GMAKE ones, and probably
should be committed separately, but I'm not splitting the diff for personal
convenience, sorry. :)

./danfe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ph-gmake.diff
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 3515 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/attachments/20140117/380c8650/attachment.diff>