Compiling sguil-server on Release 9.2 i386

John Marino at
Mon Oct 21 17:09:49 UTC 2013

On 10/21/2013 18:15, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> --On October 21, 2013 7:48:59 AM +0200 John Marino
> The dependency is mysqltcl.  That port installs two files in
> ${LOCALBASE}/lib/mysqltcl-${PORTVERSION}/.  How do you reference those
> files without using the portversion?

Look at section 5.8.9 of the Porters Handbook:

Something like this should work:
RUN_DEPENDS+= mysqltcl>3:${PORTSDIR}/databases/mysqltcl

With that line, you can forgot the shell command above.  It means, use
any version of  mysqltcl 3.0 or greater.

> When I work on my ports I create a new directory ${PORTNAME}-update. 
> Then I svn the port into that directory, which creates a subdirectory
> named ${PORTNAME}.  With ${.CURDIR}../../../ the build will not descend
> to /usr/ports but to /usr/ports/security and the build will break.  I
> fail to see how that can be correct.  If I build ports anywhere other
> than the default location, the build will break.

it would be ${.CURDIR}/../../
(notice slash immediate following ${.CURDIR} and only two "../".  Really
only one is needed since since the port is in the same category.  But
this is unnecessary if you make the change above.

> Is this information documented somewhere?  And how do I overcome this
> obvious problem?

I don't know if it's documented or not.  The more common occurrence is
trying to include a file from another port, rather than trying to "make"
a port (which has forked bombed me when it ran into an unexpected error
which is why I hate make in a shell so much).

> There are multiple ways to point out problems.  One way is to point to
> the problem and say, "Look - you screwed up here."  That's your way, and
> I can assure you it doesn't lend to a sense of cooperation and learning.

If you want to get pedantic, I never addressed you directly or by name.
 I said the option wasn't properly tested (obviously true) and that
there were multiple problems with it (again true).  I told the user to
open a PR and document it, and let the maintainer deal with it.  I'm a
bit perplexed about why you are so sensitive about it.  It's a honest
mistake, I think you learned from it, move on.  Nobody thinks less, this
kind of thing is discovered all the time.

>> You know, you could have just said, "Thank you" as I've spent a
>> considerable time on this topic when nobody else did.
> Yes, and you could have been a lot more pleasant.  Don't forget, port
> maintainers are volunteers.

What do you think I am?

> maintainers are volunteers.  I spend my personal time working on these
> problems, and the thanks I get from you is, hey, you screwed this up,
> you screwed that up, in fact, I can see five or six problems just from a
> brief look at your port instead of here's what the problem is, and
> here's a way to fix it.

1. I can't stress enough that you were never addressed directly or by name.
2. I only stated the truth
3. Do you really think I should do this for you?  Or spoon-feed you?  I
believe I gave you more than enough information to both understand the
problem and figure out the solution.  that's how people learn.

> It's not an attitude that makes me want to get to work on fixing the
> problems.

How about pride in a job well done?
Again, I think you should accept this in the spirit it was given.  If
you found it "unpleasant", I'm sorry but that wasn't the intention.


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list