Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
* G??bor K??vesd??n ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I agree with every your word.
I was to implement it in this way, but as I said this would require us
to change all of the *_DEPENDS lines. Erwin told me that this can't be
happen, so I was pushed to go the another way. Erwin is in portmgr, and
portmgr's word make sense in these questions...
Why change _DEPENDS lines in ports while we can prepend DESTDIR where
needed in bsd.port.mk? I can make the patches if needed
Maybe with a hackery you can. I haven't thought of such special thing.
Can you show how you mean?
This is exactly I proposed. But I've not been heard.
You have been, but this will happen later, after an -exp run as Erwin
said. And in the opposite form. Ports that don't respect DESTDIR will be
marked.
Could you point me to any information regarding this -exp?
Honestly I don't get how the software can be proven working without
human inspection.
Ok, there can be errors on stderr. But what about GUI software? There
will be messageboxes, how to detect these? Or there will be no
complaints at all, software just won't work properly (i.e. a game will
run with no textures/no sound etc.).
We may search for paths in all files installed by port (simple
grep(1) on text files, strings(1)|grep on binaries) to detect wrong
paths - that's far more reliable - is that what's done?
An -exp run is a full run on the package building cluster that is
maintained by [EMAIL PROTECTED] You might contact them on this address. I don't
know what I can do now myself, I just did what I've been told to do:
wrote an implementation where only small modifications are necessary to
make ports respect DESTDIR, but many people seem to be unsatisfied and
disappointed with this solution.
--
Cheers,
Gabor
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
