ATTENTION: is the way DESTDIR was introduced completely wrong?

[Dmitry Marakasov]

* G??bor K??vesd??n (gabor at FreeBSD.org) wrote:
> >I agree with every your word.
> I was to implement it in this way, but as I said this would require us 
> to change all of the *_DEPENDS lines. Erwin told me that this can't be 
> happen, so I was pushed to go the another way. Erwin is in portmgr, and 
> portmgr's word make sense in these questions...
Why change _DEPENDS lines in ports while we can prepend DESTDIR where
needed in bsd.port.mk? I can make the patches if needed.

> >This is exactly I proposed. But I've not been heard.
> You have been, but this will happen later, after an -exp run as Erwin 
> said. And in the opposite form. Ports that don't respect DESTDIR will be 
> marked.
Could you point me to any information regarding this -exp?
Honestly I don't get how the software can be proven working without
human inspection.
Ok, there can be errors on stderr. But what about GUI software? There
will be messageboxes, how to detect these? Or there will be no
complaints at all, software just won't work properly (i.e. a game will
run with no textures/no sound etc.).
We may search for paths in all files installed by port (simple
grep(1) on text files, strings(1)|grep on binaries) to detect wrong
paths - that's far more reliable - is that what's done?

-- 
Best regards,
 Dmitry                          mailto:amdmi3 at mail.ru