Is it Ok to write files into ${STAGEDIR}/${PREFIX} on "build" stage?

[Lev Serebryakov]

Hello, Boris.
You wrote 25 января 2014 г., 14:06:12:

>>   How this contradict with putting file to ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX} before
>> "stage" phase (I don't like word "stage" instead of "phase" here due to
>> obvious reason)?
BS> To my mind build is, well, for building and install... you know...
 Yep, but here I need binutils to build gcc and I need to build gcc three
(!) times. Cross-build toolchains are ugly, you now...

>> Now my port does all "installation" (from upstream
>> software point of view) into ${STAGEDIR}${PREFIX} at port build phase
>> ("do-build" target from port's Makefile point of view), "stage" phase
>> (really "do-install" target from port's Makefile point of view) is no-op,
>> and it works!
BS> And that (install while being at build target) is imho not good. May be
BS> not now but later. May be with different user rights...
BS> One more time -- it's just my imho. _I_ wouldn't do so.
 Ok, I could add one more directory (port-specifc stage dir, really) and
 make install to be "${TAR} -cf - -C ${MYSTAGE} . | ${TAR} -cf - -C
 ${STATGEDIR}" :) It eill take even more space (now ${WRKSRC} is 5.1G after
 everything is done), but Ok.

>> BS> And yes, this system has a drawback. If you write an application only
>> BS> for FreeBSD, it is a monolith one (no docs, examples, etc.) and you
>> BS> use only ports system (no packages) then you'll get your application
>> BS> duplicate disk consumption (at stage/install phase).
>>   I have docs, examples, etc. And use packages. It works. It supports
>>  NOPORTDOCS / NOPORTEXAMPLES properly in all cases. I could send port
>>  prototype to you to examine.
BS> Please, do. I'll try to scrub it.
  In private mail.

-- 
// Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev at FreeBSD.org>