Marc, Stuart,
Does that mean it's okay to commit below change?
Index: bsd.port.mk
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk,v
retrieving revision 1.1542
diff -u -p -u -r1.1542 bsd.port.mk
--- bsd.port.mk 26 Jun 2020 11:51:16 -0000 1.1542
+++ bsd.port.mk 1 Jan 2021 19:48:31 -0000
@@ -1201,7 +1201,7 @@ _pkg_cookie${_S} = ${_PACKAGE_COOKIE${_S
. if ${DEBUG_PACKAGES:M${_S}}
_DBG_PKG_ARGS${_S} := ${PKG_ARGS${_S}}
_DBG_PKG_ARGS${_S} +=
-P${FULLPKGPATH${_S}}:${FULLPKGNAME${_S}}:${FULLPKGNAME${_S}}
-_DBG_PKG_ARGS${_S} += -DCOMMENT="debug info for ${FULLPKGNAME${_S}}"
+_DBG_PKG_ARGS${_S} += -DCOMMENT="debug info for ${PKGSTEM${_S}}"
_DBG_PKG_ARGS${_S} += -d"-debug info for ${FULLPKGNAME${_S}}"
# XXX revisit that fullpkgpath later ?
_DBG_PKG_ARGS${_S} += -DFULLPKGPATH=debug/${FULLPKGPATH${_S}}
Full thread at https://marc.info/?t=160953089400002&r=1&w=2
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 01:05:14PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 11:45:24AM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > On 2021/02/02 10:05, Marc Espie wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 09:50:50PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > > You are correct that it will require bumping every port that has
> > > > debug packages. It might be better to only change the comment
> > > > if it's too long (so that existing ones aren't changed).
> > >
> > > Actually, I'm not sure it's strictly required. In fact it's not.
> > >
> > > See, debug packages don't go through register-plist, so changes
> > > are not really a problem with them.
> >
> > Oh, that's a bit of luck!
>
> More of a design property actually :)
>
> There's an explicit test in the packaging loop to avoid registering
> debug-packages, for several reasons
> - their packing-lists don't exist independently of normal packages
> - I don't think you'd fancy twice that many files in the plist directory
> - it allowed for rapid development while in-tree, as the generating code
> has had to evolve several times.
>
--
Regards,
Mikolaj
