PATCH: Adding config-recursive to bsd.port.mk
Chris Dillon
cdillon at wolves.k12.mo.us
Mon Dec 13 23:05:58 PST 2004
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 12:15:10AM -0600, Chris Dillon wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 10:24:38PM -0600, Chris Dillon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I got tired of starting long port builds with lots of dependances
>>>> (KDE, etc.) and having many of the ports stop the whole build
>>>> process to ask me what config options I wanted. So, I thought what
>>>> if I could easily pre-config all of the dependancies? Here is the
>>>> result, pretty much cut & paste from the fetch-recursive bits.
>>>> Patch attached, but if it doesn't come through it is available
>>>> here:
>>>
>>> Shouldn't it only do this for ports which aren't installed yet?
>>
>> What harm might come if the port is already installed and we create a
>> new config file for it? All I can think of is that some of the
>> options you thought you were going to get may not be there when it is
>> all done since the port was already built, but it shouldn't break
>> anything. At worst, you would have to re-install those ports which
>> were already installed to affect the changes you made to the config.
>> You would have had to do that anyway if it were necessary, even
>> without running this. This just gives you an easy way to run 'make
>> config' on all the dependancies of a particular port.
>
> There would be no harm, but it is strange to exchange one annoying
> behaviour with another one: instead of having your build interrupted
> to config a every new port, you have to re-config every port again.
> And again. And again.
OK, I see your point. I have added a check to see if the port is
already config'd and skip it. I also added a 'rmconfig-recursive'
target so that if you really do want to re-configure all dependencies
you can easily remove them all first, then run 'config-recursive'.
New patch is at:
ftp://ftp.wolves.k12.mo.us/pub/stuff/config-recursive.patch
If this is acceptable I will submit it in a PR for portmgr to
consider.
--
Chris Dillon - cdillon(at)wolves.k12.mo.us
FreeBSD: The fastest, most open, and most stable OS on the planet
- Available for IA32, IA64, AMD64, PC98, Alpha, and UltraSPARC architectures
- PowerPC, ARM, MIPS, and S/390 under development
- http://www.freebsd.org
Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon?
More information about the freebsd-ports
mailing list