Re: setting X11BASE
I'm finding it especially interesting that /etc/make.conf,
which to judge from its location is part of the base, depends
on a setting from something in the /usr/ports tree.
Well, actually it doesn't. What gives you this impression?
Paul Schmehl reported where LOCALBASE is set:
in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk
Now I'm being told to add this:
X11BASE=${LOCALBASE}
to /etc/make.conf, so that /etc/make.conf needs LOCALBASE to be
set in order to set X11BASE correctly. Is that not a dependency?
You assume make(1)'s variable assignment is done on encounter base
at runtime. It isn't:
# echo LOCALBASE=/usr/local /tmp/foo.mk
# echo 'X11BASE=${LOCALBASE}' /etc/make.conf
# make -f /tmp/foo.mk -V X11BASE
/usr/local
# echo LOCALBASE=/tmp /tmp/foo.mk
# make -f /tmp/foo.mk -V X11BASE
/tmp
For your academic interest:
gzcat /usr/share/doc/psd/12.make/paper.ascii.gz|$PAGER
I know perfectly well how make works. The point is, if we have
X11BASE=${LOCALBASE}
in /etc/make.conf, X11BASE is going to be set *correctly* during
any particular execution of make only if LOCALBASE is set somewhere
in the makefiles that are processed during that execution of make.
If we run make under conditions that *don't* involve processing
/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk -- such as when building something
that isn't a port -- X11BASE is going to be *wrong* (unless a
definition gets provided somewhere else, as in your examples).
IOW adding this line to /etc/make.conf creates a dependency on
/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk, and that seems undesirable. Would
it not be better to put it somewhere under /usr/ports/Mk or
/usr/local/etc, rather than polluting the base with a ports-ism?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
LOCALBASE is /usr/local unless you've changed it (but then you would already know what it was if you had.) You can find its value in /usr/ports/Mk/ grep LOCALBASE?= /usr/ports/Mk/* /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk:LOCALBASE?= /usr/local Aha! In case it matters, I have not upgraded to the modular Xorg, and would prefer not to go through all that. It ain't broke ... ... if you want to stay with the old system, you're probably going to need to put USE_NONDEFAULT_X11BASE?=/usr/X11R6 in your make.conf file to keep your ports from breaking in interesting ways ... Aha! again. Read /usr/ports/UPDATING carefully before proceeding. I did, but only as far back as the last time I updated, and I skipped entries which were identified as affecting ports I haven't installed or don't use ... including the modular xorg which I'm trying to avoid. (I figure it can wait until I do a clean install, on a different machine, using 7.0 when it comes out.) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
* What is the value of LOCALBASE? I'm not finding any
definition, or other reference, in /etc/make.conf.
Just set it to ${LOCALBASE} verbatim. Not what you think is the
value of the variable LOCALBASE but the word ${LOCALBASE}.
Academic interest :)
I'm finding it especially interesting that /etc/make.conf, which
to judge from its location is part of the base, depends on a setting
from something in the /usr/ports tree.
In case it matters, I have not upgraded to the modular Xorg, and
would prefer not to go through all that. It ain't broke ...
True, but your portstree is now 'broken', because support for how
it used to work is being phased out, like the whole X11BASE thing.
I think if you upgrade anything that depends on xorg, you'll find
dependencies being pulled in that are part of the modular xorg,
unless you really know what you're doing.
... which is why I am trying to install portmaster before doing
anything else. I may try pkg_tree also, if it doesn't lead into
a dependency maze of its own.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* What is the value of LOCALBASE? I'm not finding any
definition, or other reference, in /etc/make.conf.
Just set it to ${LOCALBASE} verbatim. Not what you think is the
value of the variable LOCALBASE but the word ${LOCALBASE}.
Academic interest :)
I'm finding it especially interesting that /etc/make.conf, which
to judge from its location is part of the base, depends on a setting
from something in the /usr/ports tree.
Well, actually it doesn't. What gives you this impression?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
On Saturday 23 February 2008 09:01:26 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* What is the value of LOCALBASE? I'm not finding any
definition, or other reference, in /etc/make.conf.
Just set it to ${LOCALBASE} verbatim. Not what you think is the
value of the variable LOCALBASE but the word ${LOCALBASE}.
Academic interest :)
I'm finding it especially interesting that /etc/make.conf, which
to judge from its location is part of the base, depends on a setting
from something in the /usr/ports tree.
No, the ports tree uses make(1), a base utility and the global configuration
file for make is /etc/make.conf. So the ports tree depends on a base utility.
--
Mel
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
* What is the value of LOCALBASE? I'm not finding any
definition, or other reference, in /etc/make.conf.
Just set it to ${LOCALBASE} verbatim. Not what you think is the
value of the variable LOCALBASE but the word ${LOCALBASE}.
Academic interest :)
I'm finding it especially interesting that /etc/make.conf,
which to judge from its location is part of the base, depends
on a setting from something in the /usr/ports tree.
Well, actually it doesn't. What gives you this impression?
Paul Schmehl reported where LOCALBASE is set: in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk
Now I'm being told to add this:
X11BASE=${LOCALBASE}
to /etc/make.conf, so that /etc/make.conf needs LOCALBASE to be set
in order to set X11BASE correctly. Is that not a dependency?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
On Saturday 23 February 2008 18:58:22 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* What is the value of LOCALBASE? I'm not finding any
definition, or other reference, in /etc/make.conf.
Just set it to ${LOCALBASE} verbatim. Not what you think is the
value of the variable LOCALBASE but the word ${LOCALBASE}.
Academic interest :)
I'm finding it especially interesting that /etc/make.conf,
which to judge from its location is part of the base, depends
on a setting from something in the /usr/ports tree.
Well, actually it doesn't. What gives you this impression?
Paul Schmehl reported where LOCALBASE is set: in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk
Now I'm being told to add this:
X11BASE=${LOCALBASE}
to /etc/make.conf, so that /etc/make.conf needs LOCALBASE to be set
in order to set X11BASE correctly. Is that not a dependency?
You assume make(1)'s variable assignment is done on encounter base at runtime.
It isn't:
# echo LOCALBASE=/usr/local /tmp/foo.mk
# echo 'X11BASE=${LOCALBASE}' /etc/make.conf
# make -f /tmp/foo.mk -V X11BASE
/usr/local
# echo LOCALBASE=/tmp /tmp/foo.mk
# make -f /tmp/foo.mk -V X11BASE
/tmp
For your academic interest:
gzcat /usr/share/doc/psd/12.make/paper.ascii.gz|$PAGER
--
Mel
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
--On February 23, 2008 9:58:22 AM -0800 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm finding it especially interesting that /etc/make.conf,
which to judge from its location is part of the base, depends
on a setting from something in the /usr/ports tree.
Well, actually it doesn't. What gives you this impression?
Paul Schmehl reported where LOCALBASE is set: in
/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk
Now I'm being told to add this:
X11BASE=${LOCALBASE}
to /etc/make.conf, so that /etc/make.conf needs LOCALBASE to be set
in order to set X11BASE correctly. Is that not a dependency?
You're looking at it in the reverse of what it really is.
LOCALBASE is set in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk so that *ports* know where
to install stuff. And X11BASE needs to be set to ${LOCALBASE} in
/etc/make.conf because *ports* need to know that X11BASE has changed from
the previous default of /usr/X11R6.
A dependency is a program that a *port* requires to function properly, not
a *location* where ports install their files.
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
On Friday 22 February 2008 08:07:29 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After updating with portsnap, I am getting an insufficiently-helpful
error message:
On FreeBSD before 6.2 ports system unfortunately can not set
default X11BASE by itself so please help it a bit by setting
X11BASE=${LOCALBASE} in make.conf. On the other hand, if
you do wish to use non-default X11BASE, please set variable
USE_NONDEFAULT_X11BASE.
* Am I correct in *guessing* that make.conf refers to
/etc/make.conf?
Yes.
* What is the value of LOCALBASE? I'm not finding any
definition, or other reference, in /etc/make.conf.
Just set it to ${LOCALBASE} verbatim. Not what you think is the value of the
variable LOCALBASE but the word ${LOCALBASE}.
* How do I figure out whether I should set USE_NONDEFAULT_X11BASE?
You don't have to.
* Why does it even need this? The port I am trying to install
ATM (portmaster, to get a handle on the dependency maze) has
nothing to do with X11.
Because portmaster checks the status of your ports installation for sanity.
In case it matters, I have not upgraded to the modular Xorg, and
would prefer not to go through all that. It ain't broke ...
True, but your portstree is now 'broken', because support for how it used to
work is being phased out, like the whole X11BASE thing. I think if you
upgrade anything that depends on xorg, you'll find dependencies being pulled
in that are part of the modular xorg, unless you really know what you're
doing.
--
Mel
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: setting X11BASE
--On Thursday, February 21, 2008 23:07:29 -0800 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After updating with portsnap, I am getting an insufficiently-helpful
error message:
On FreeBSD before 6.2 ports system unfortunately can not set
default X11BASE by itself so please help it a bit by setting
X11BASE=${LOCALBASE} in make.conf. On the other hand, if
you do wish to use non-default X11BASE, please set variable
USE_NONDEFAULT_X11BASE.
* Am I correct in *guessing* that make.conf refers to
/etc/make.conf?
Yes.
* What is the value of LOCALBASE? I'm not finding any
definition, or other reference, in /etc/make.conf.
LOCALBASE is /usr/local unless you've changed it (but then you would already
know what it was if you had.) You can find its value in /usr/ports/Mk/
grep LOCALBASE?= /usr/ports/Mk/*
/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk:LOCALBASE?= /usr/local
* How do I figure out whether I should set USE_NONDEFAULT_X11BASE?
See below.
* Why does it even need this? The port I am trying to install
ATM (portmaster, to get a handle on the dependency maze) has
nothing to do with X11.
It needs it because there are ports in the x11/xorg system that are
dependencies for ports that have nothing to do with a GUI. Libraries are
frequently used to incorporate certain functionalities without having to
reinvent an already well vetted wheel.
In case it matters, I have not upgraded to the modular Xorg, and
would prefer not to go through all that. It ain't broke ...
You're going to regret that decision more and more over time. In fact, if you
want to stay with the old system, you're probably going to need to put
USE_NONDEFAULT_X11BASE?=/usr/X11R6 in your make.conf file to keep your ports
from breaking in interesting ways.
All the ports are now being built with the assumption that X11BASE==LOCALBASE.
Read /usr/ports/UPDATING carefully before proceeding.
--
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
setting X11BASE
After updating with portsnap, I am getting an insufficiently-helpful
error message:
On FreeBSD before 6.2 ports system unfortunately can not set
default X11BASE by itself so please help it a bit by setting
X11BASE=${LOCALBASE} in make.conf. On the other hand, if
you do wish to use non-default X11BASE, please set variable
USE_NONDEFAULT_X11BASE.
* Am I correct in *guessing* that make.conf refers to
/etc/make.conf?
* What is the value of LOCALBASE? I'm not finding any
definition, or other reference, in /etc/make.conf.
* How do I figure out whether I should set USE_NONDEFAULT_X11BASE?
* Why does it even need this? The port I am trying to install
ATM (portmaster, to get a handle on the dependency maze) has
nothing to do with X11.
In case it matters, I have not upgraded to the modular Xorg, and
would prefer not to go through all that. It ain't broke ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
