make package for ports, general question
jhelfman at e-e.com
Thu Feb 25 15:52:01 UTC 2010
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 09:25:09AM +0100, Dominic Fandrey thus spake:
>On 25/02/2010 06:25, Jason wrote:
>> That being said, I ran into an item today that had me perplexed.
>> Basically, it comes down to this:
>> Why is it that "make package" doesn't include the execution instructions
>> noted in the Makefile. To me, with my new knowledge of the ports system,
>> seems like double the work for development and maintaining a port and
>> package. ...
>It's not like that at all. You should only add stuff into the ports
>Makefile that installs new files into the system.
This make much more sense now.
>Everything else, like creating groups and users, updating an index
>and so forth, should only be done in the pkg-install script.
That's unfortunate for the user installation, as you can use the native
USERS directive in Makefiles to install users. I've started using local UID
and GID files to install users, and it has worked out rather well. I suppose
removing the functionality from the Makefile, yet keeping those files
up-to-date for reference, is still a good idea.
need to go into a pkg-install file?
I saw that there is a "Do & Dont's" on the todo list at wiki.freebsd.org for
Ports. Maybe adding some of this information in there would be good.
>There is no redundancy.
Thank you for the explanation,
>A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
>Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
More information about the freebsd-ports