On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 09:28:34PM +0000, Marcin Wisnicki wrote: > On Sun, 10 May 2009 15:22:04 -0400, Glen Barber wrote: > > > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Marcin Wisnicki > > <mwisnicki+free...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> They will be installed since they are run dependencies. > >> > >>From what I can tell (from several metaports) -- they, themselves, are > > not installed. The ports defined in the metaport are installed. > > That's the point. The metaports should be installed as well (reasons given > in my original mail). > > > There is no source code for, using your example, CUPS[1]. CUPS (in the > > FreeBSD ports tree) is, for lack of a better explanation, a pointer to > > which specific ports you need to have in order to get a fully operation > > CUPS system running. Looking at the Makefile for print/cups [2] you can > > see the dependencies and that CUPS is not actually built (which in > > definition is what makes this a metaport). > > I know this. > > The proper way to make a metaport is to: > 1. use only RUN_DEPENDS > 2. set NO_BUILD > 3. do *NOT* set NO_INSTALL > 4. provide empty do-install target > > There are several metaports that get it right, like for example x11/gnome2: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/x11/gnome2/Makefile?rev=1.155
Based upon your description I think this is a bug in the CUPS port. I'd suggest you file a PR so that it can be tracked and (hopefully) addressed. -- WXS _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
