A new and better way to do "make readmes"?

Torfinn Ingolfsen tingox at gmail.com
Sat Jan 28 17:44:49 UTC 2012


On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Conrad J. Sabatier <conrads at cox.net> wrote:

> I've been thinking for a long time that we need a better way to do
> "make readmes", one that would be properly integrated into our
> ports Mk infrastructure, to take advantage of make's ability to
> recognize which files are up-to-date and which really do need
> rebuilding.
> I like to make sure my README.html files are all up-to-date after my
> nightly ports tree update, but with the current scheme, that means
> either rebuilding *all* of the files in the tree, or (as I'm doing at
> present) using some sort of "kludgey" (kludgy?) workaround.
So people are actually using the readme files?
Are many people using them?
I ask because I *never* use them (unless they are used by 'make search'?),
I always use freshports.org (BTW, thanks for an excellent service!) when I
need to find out anything about a port.

Torfinn Ingolfsen

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list