Is there an equivalent of NO_EXTRACT?
pkubaj at riseup.net
Wed Sep 9 05:09:57 UTC 2015
On 09/09/2015 07:07, Ben Woods wrote:
> On 9 September 2015 at 07:00, Piotr Kubaj <pkubaj at riseup.net> wrote:
>> On 09/09/2015 06:44, Don Lewis wrote:
>>> If you list the distfiles that you want to have automatically extracted
>>> in EXTRACT_ONLY, then it will leave the unlisted ones untouched.
>> But I want the other one to properly extract and compile. Does that mean
>> I'd have to write my own extract: step?
> No need to write your own extract: step. EXTRACT_ONLY will do what you
> need. A quote from the Porter's handbook:
> 5.4.6. EXTRACT_ONLY
> If only some of the DISTFILES must be extracted—for example, one of
> them is the source code, while another is an uncompressed
> document—list the filenames that must be extracted in EXTRACT_ONLY.
> DISTFILES= source.tar.gz manual.html
> EXTRACT_ONLY= source.tar.gz
> When none of the DISTFILES need to be uncompressed, set EXTRACT_ONLY
> to the empty string.
> Hope that clears it up for you.
Thanks! I've searched the porter's handbook, but I guess I didn't notice
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the freebsd-ports