Lucas Hazel [2008-06-27 09:40]: > On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:30:47 +0200 > Juergen Daubert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > > I'd not call the file .arch but find a better name that reflects more > > what it really does, pulling in different settings to build the port. > > It should be read after pkgmk.conf so it would be possible to alter > > other variables like MAKEFLAGS for example. > > > > One drawback of the .xxxx file approach is that a modification of > > pkgmk is required, but I tend to favor that solution. > > Perhaps an alternative solution would be to have a .pkgmk.conf to allow > the port to make extra changes that may be required, such as extra > CFLAGS, MAKEFLAGS, and so on. For example, with compat32 > stuff .pkgmk.conf could contain, > > . /etc/pkgmk-compat32.conf > > This would remove the need for PKGMK_ARCH and the case structure in my > version of pkgmk.conf. > > This could also allow a number of x86_64 ports that for example, have to > have -fPIC set in their CFLAGS to have the same build script as the > offificial ones as in those ports as the extra CFLAGS could be set > in .pkgmk.conf rather than in build().
I prefer .arch. Looks like the least intrusive approach to me. So, I'm ACKing the patches you linked to in your original mail. Regards, Tilman -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
pgpjra2NQft2i.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ crux-devel mailing list crux-devel@lists.crux.nu http://lists.crux.nu/mailman/listinfo/crux-devel
