HEADS UP: New bsd.*.mk changes
Joe Marcus Clarke
marcus at FreeBSD.org
Tue Jan 20 11:05:13 PST 2004
On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 13:41, Marius Strobl wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 01:05:17PM -0500, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> > On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 13:02, Marius Strobl wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 12:29:55PM -0500, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree. This approach seems the most flexible. As for not being able
> > > > to do non-root installs, this is a bogus argument as one could simply
> > > > override PORT_DBDIR as they would PKG_DBDIR (even with the original
> > > > patch).
> > > >
> > >
> > > I was taking about non-root builds, e.g. single ports checked out
> > > outside of PKGBASE to do maintenance work, not non-root installs. In
> > > an environment where non-root installs are done your argument is valid.
> > > Not being able to do non-root builds compilcates the job of maintainers.
> > As I said, non-root builds could override PORT_DBDIR the same way you
> > could override PKG_DBDIR. You could point that to a directory to which
> > you could write. What am I missing?
> In general I'd like to further on be able to build a port as non-root
> and install als root, with default PREFIX, PKG_DBDIR and PORT_DBDIR.
Ah, I follow you.
> I don't see how this currently should work, if I set PORT_DBDIR to a
> directory I can write to before I build the port as non-root it won't
> neither read an existing OPTIONSFILE in the default location nor write
> a possibly changed OPTIONSFILE to the new location. I could move around
> the OPTIONSFILE before and after installing the port but that's really
> At a first glance I don't see a reason why creation of PORT_DBDIR if
> not already existing and writing of the OPTIONSFILE can't be done in
> e.g. the fake-pkg target or a new target that's executed directly
> before or after fake-pkg.
This may work, but it would require some reworking of the existing
architecture, and, depending on patch complexity, may require another
test build on bento. Did you have something specific to review?
Joe Marcus Clarke
FreeBSD GNOME Team :: marcus at FreeBSD.org
gnome at FreeBSD.org
FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20040120/95b362be/attachment.bin
More information about the freebsd-ports