HEADS UP: New bsd.*.mk changes

Oliver Eikemeier eikemeier at fillmore-labs.com
Tue Jan 20 10:17:26 PST 2004

Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 13:03, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
>>Adam Weinberger wrote:
>>>>>(01.20.2004 @ 1248 PST): Joe Marcus Clarke said, in 3.9K: <<
>>>>>Can we at least have
>>>>>here? It makes sense for all the localized ports, perl, ruby, python, linux
>>>>>and others.
>>>>That makes sense...maybe having the whole trifecta is a good idea, too:
>>>>And what about UNIQUENAME instead of OPTIONSNAME?  This way, it could be
>>>>used for other purposes.
>>>>>end of "Re: HEADS UP: New bsd.*.mk changes" from Joe Marcus Clarke <<
>>>If all you're going for is a unique identifier for each port, this is
>>>guaranteed unique:
>>>${.CURDIR:S@${PORTSDIR}@@:S@/@_ at g}
>>>x11_gnome2, etc.
>>Sorry to bring it up again, LATEST_LINK is designed to do what we want, it
>>has just a stupid name...
>>Look at
>>  <http://bento.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-packages-5-latest/Latest/>
>>all packages in one directory, no collisions, version independend. It even
>>survives renaming / category changes.
> Except not every port creates a LATEST_LINK.

Every port sets the variable LATEST_LINK (by default to
override it with something suitable (openldap, apache). Only the ports that build
no packages (like the jdk ports) don't care and have the same LATEST_LINK.

I totally agree that nobody want to use a variable called 'LATEST_LINK' used for that
purpose, but, hey, it's just a name. If we use something like
we have to use an workaround only for the port that build no packages, the rest should
be automagically right. All the work of thinking of an unique name has already been done
for a lot of ports.

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list