openbsd-ports
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Questions on localbase again

To: ports@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Questions on localbase again
From: naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 12:40:56 +0000 (UTC)
Newsgroups: list.openbsd.ports
References: <9kkm1h$2p0c$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108061245040.11615-100000@saitti.net>
Sender: owner-ports@openbsd.org
Heikki Korpela <heko@iki.fi> wrote:

> > Ports _should_ transparently handle this.  If a port doesn't, it's
> > a bug that should be fixed.
> 
> Either I misunderstood something (quite possible :-) or this
> conflicts with what Brad said about creating another fake.mtree

No, what I meant is that _given a modified fake.mtree_, ports should
handle a change in LOCALBASE transparently.

> So, should ports handle creating proper
> ${LOCALBASE}/{bin,man,lib,include,...} even when fake.mtree
> doesn't create them?

No, there's no need to ensure this.  I mean, that's what fake.mtree
is for.

> > Also, I suspect a good many configure scripts check for
> > things in /usr/local but not in your custom path.
> 
> Hmm, doesn't this stuff in bsd.port.mk take care of that?
> PORTPATH?= /usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:${LOCALBASE}/bin:${X11BASE}/bin

Doesn't help if the script is hardcoded.  Just how many are is
anybody's guess.

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy@mips.inka.de

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>