Proposed patch to inform users of fetchindex

[Doug Barton]

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Adam Weinberger wrote:

> Doug Barton wrote:
>> I can't help but think that the majority of users try to build their own 
>> index because they don't know that there is a better alternative. What 
>> would y'all think of the following patch?
>
> I like the warning, but I don't think that making a new target is really a 
> good thing. I think that printing the warning message at the beginning of a 
> 'make index' is better than having 'make index' not result in any INDEX 
> whatsoever.

Another way to approach it would be:

Index: Makefile
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/pcvs/ports/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.90
diff -u -r1.90 Makefile
--- Makefile	17 Dec 2004 11:23:22 -0000	1.90
+++ Makefile	31 Jan 2005 23:59:53 -0000
@@ -66,8 +66,12 @@
  .include <bsd.port.subdir.mk>

  index:
+.if !defined(I_REALLY_MEAN_IT)
+	@${ECHO} 'Warning'
+.else
  	@rm -f ${.CURDIR}/${INDEXFILE}
  	@cd ${.CURDIR} && make ${.CURDIR}/${INDEXFILE}
+.endif

  fetchindex:
  	@cd ${.CURDIR} && ${FETCHINDEX} ${MASTER_SITE_INDEX}/${INDEXFILE}.bz2 && bunzip2 -f ${INDEXFILE}.bz2 && chmod a+r ${INDEXFILE}


Or similar ... It's the general concept I want to get across here, the 
implementation is a SMOP.

Doug

-- 

     This .signature sanitized for your protection