Why does bsd.port.mk override make's search for Makefiles...?

Will Andrews will at csociety.org
Thu Jul 8 22:16:04 PDT 2004

On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 10:17:27PM -0400, Wesley Shields wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 02:14:50PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> > As per the subject, why are these set in bsd.port.mk?
> > 
> > MAKE_FLAGS?=    -f
> > MAKEFILE?=      Makefile
> > 
> > I was just trying to port something that had a "makefile" rather than a 
> > "Makefile", and was utterly baffled for a moment as to why make couldn't 
> > find this.
> > 
> > -- 
> > -Chuck
> Those are set because they are the defaults (almost all software uses
> Makefile instead of makefile) but if you come across one that doesn't
> just set this in your Makefile...

That's the long-accepted solution, but it doesn't really answer
his question.  I thought about it and realized I had no idea of
any make programs for which those defaults were necessary.
However, sometimes ports DO need to use a nonstandard makefile
name that is NOT searched by at least bmake and gmake.

Perhaps the best thing to do might be to replace the b.p.m code:

.if defined(MAKE_FILE)

(Note this affects PR #30331[1], which I was working on some time
ago and really need to finish.)

[1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/30331

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20040709/b1cd9942/attachment.bin

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list