Re: update MULTI_PACKAGE example in faq/ports/guide.html

[Marc Espie]

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 01:29:31PM +0100, Omar Polo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I was looking at the guide.html and the MULTI_PACKAGE example caught my
> eye: it keeps mentioning -core but AFAIK the main package is, err,
> -main.  Also, after a recent-ish change by espie the various PKGNAME-xyz
> are not needed as they have a sensible default.
> 
> While I was here I've also indented the lines and sorted some variables
> as per template more or less, the reasoning being that IMHO it still
> count as an example of how to write a port makefile so we might just as
> well do it well.  I've also changed slightly how MULTI_PACKAGES is
> handled: i.e. define both -main and -x11 together since the x11 is
> already excluded when the user specifies the no_x11 flavor.  This
> produces:
> 
>       % make show=PKGNAMES
>       foo-1.0 foo-x11-1.0
>       % FLAVOR=no_x11 make show=PKGNAMES
>       foo-1.0
> 
> as expected.
> 
> I've also changed how the CONFIGURE_ARGS is handled following how
> x11/wxWidgets does it.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 
> Index: guide.html
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /home/cvs/www/faq/ports/guide.html,v
> retrieving revision 1.95
> diff -u -p -r1.95 guide.html
> --- guide.html        26 Nov 2021 07:53:26 -0000      1.95
> +++ guide.html        26 Jan 2022 12:28:42 -0000
> @@ -801,8 +801,6 @@ in two variants:
>  You need to write those <code>COMMENT-s1</code> and <code>COMMENT-s2</code>
>  in the <code>Makefile</code>, split your <code>PLIST</code> into two parts,
>  and create <code>DESCR-s1/DESCR-s2</code>.
> -You will also need to specify separate <code>PKGNAME</code>s
> -for all subpackages.
>  
>  <p>
>  It is a good idea to start with the minimal framework work required:
> @@ -846,35 +844,37 @@ allowed to modify the actual package con
>  
>  <p>
>  For instance, assuming you separated the graphical interface into a separate
> -subpackage (<code>MULTI_PACKAGES=-core -x11</code>), you could create a 
> pseudo
> +subpackage (<code>MULTI_PACKAGES=-main -x11</code>), you could create a 
> pseudo
>  flavor <code>no_x11</code> that avoids building the -x11 subpackage.
> -The crucial point is that this flavor should NOT affect the -core package
> +The crucial point is that this flavor should NOT affect the -main package
>  in any way.
>  
>  <p>
>  You would end up with a <code>Makefile</code> that looks something like this:
>  
>  <pre class="cmdbox">
> -CATEGORIES = app
> -COMMENT-core = foo core application
> -COMMENT-x11 = foo graphical interface
> -V = 1.0
> -DISTNAME = foo-$V
> -PKGNAME-core = foo-core-$V
> -PKGNAME-x11 = foo-x11-$V
> -PSEUDO_FLAVORS = no_x11
> +COMMENT-main =       foo core application
> +COMMENT-x11 =        foo graphical interface
> +
> +V =          1.0
> +DISTNAME =   foo-$V
> +CATEGORIES = app
> +
> +MULTI_PACKAGES =     -main -x11
> +PSEUDO_FLAVORS =     no_x11
>  FLAVOR ?=
> -CONFIGURE_STYLE = gnu
>  
> -MULTI_PACKAGES = -core
>  WANTLIB = c m crypto ssl
>  WANTLIB-x11 = ${WANTLIB} X11 Xt
> -RUN_DEPENDS-x11 = ${BASE_PKGPATH},-core
>  
> -.if ${FLAVOR:L:Mno_x11}
> +RUN_DEPENDS-x11 =    ${BASE_PKGPATH},-main>=$V
> +
> +CONFIGURE_STYLE = gnu
> +
> +.include &lt;bsd.port.arch.mk&gt;
> +
> +.if !${BUILD_PACKAGES:M-x11}
>  CONFIGURE_ARGS += --disable-x11
> -.else
> -MULTI_PACKAGES += -x11
>  .endif
>  
>  .include &lt;bsd.port.mk&gt;
> 
> 
At first glance, this looks great. Commit it, we'll fix nits if need be.