svn commit: r382492 - head/Mk/Uses

[Bryan Drewery]

On 3/28/2015 9:50 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> Author: bapt
> Date: Sat Mar 28 14:50:22 2015
> New Revision: 382492
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/382492
> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r382492/
> 
> Log:
>   Add USES=metaport to simplify writing metaports
> 
> Added:
>   head/Mk/Uses/metaport.mk   (contents, props changed)
> 
> Added: head/Mk/Uses/metaport.mk
> ==============================================================================
> --- /dev/null	00:00:00 1970	(empty, because file is newly added)
> +++ head/Mk/Uses/metaport.mk	Sat Mar 28 14:50:22 2015	(r382492)
> @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
> +# $FreeBSD$
> +#
> +# Sets the default variables to handle metaports
> +#
> +# Feature:	metaport
> +# Usage:	USES=metaport
> +#
> +# Take no arguments
> +
> +.if !defined(_INCLUDE_USES_METAPORT_MK)
> +_INCLUDE_USES_METAPORT_MK=	yes
> +
> +MASTER_SITES=	#
> +DISTFILES=	#
> +EXTRACT_ONLY=	#
> +NO_BUILD=	yes
> +NO_INSTALL=	yes
> +NO_MTREE=	yes
> +
> +.endif
> 

Now that I quickly flew past this, I think these should all be ?=. I've
had to make meta ports at work that did include 1 few files. I know they
are not quite technically "meta packages" at that point but IMHO they
still qualify. I'm not strong on this opinion though.

-- 
Regards,
Bryan Drewery

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/attachments/20150328/335e806e/attachment.sig>