Confusion over BSD.tests.dist
Garrett Cooper
yaneurabeya at gmail.com
Sun Nov 24 22:08:53 UTC 2013
On Nov 24, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Julio Merino <julio at meroh.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Forwarding this message to freebsd-testing for others to have context in terms of what I’m proposing be done.
>> Thanks!
>> -Garrett
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi at gmail.com>
>>> Subject: Confusion over BSD.tests.dist
>>> Date: November 24, 2013 at 2:01:25 PM PST
>>> To: Julio Merino <julio at meroh.net>
>>>
>>> Hi Julio,
>>> I think there’s some confusion over what the intent of this file was. I originally planned for it to be strictly for tests, and it seems to have morphed into a tests and test infrastructure mtree file. This is mostly ok, except for the fact that now if I specify TESTSBASE != /usr/tests, things will fail in the build.
>>> I’d like to fix this, but that means that the ATF/Kyua infrastructure pieces really need to be moved out into their own mtree file. Does that sound ok?
>
> Is TESTSBASE supposed to be customizable? (And before answering that:
It can be:
# grep -r TESTSBASE share/mk
share/mk/bsd.README:TESTSDIR Target directory relative to ${TESTSBASE} for tests and
share/mk/bsd.own.mk:TESTSBASE?= /usr/tests
> are things like LIBDIR or INCLUDEDIR user-tunabale?)
Those are user tunable too, but generally not tweaked, except when dealing with packages that use bsd.*.mk (e.g. ports):
# egrep --include \*.mk -r '^INCLUDEDIR|^LIBDIR' share/mk
share/mk/bsd.own.mk:LIBDIR?= /usr/lib
share/mk/bsd.own.mk:INCLUDEDIR?= /usr/include
Cheers!
-Garrett
More information about the freebsd-testing
mailing list