Re: method for installing ports
Jonathan Horne wrote: Ive read many many guides found all over the net in the past few days, and they can never seem to agree on the way a port is installed. I see these methods: Make install Make install clean Make install distclean What is the difference between the 3, and are there legitimate times when one is preferred over the other? Once you have run make with the 'install' target, you have your software installed. You may safely use the software. The 'clean' target removes the ./work subdirectory. Some folks might keep that around for various reasons. I like to keep the ./work subdir because I like to poke around in the port's config files and make files for things I can tweak. Occasionally I run 'make clean' from /usr/src to clean EVERY port in the tree to get some disc space back. The 'distclean' target deletes the downloaded distribution files for that port in /usr/ports/distfiles. I rarely do this. The choice is up to you. None of the three targets listed is more correct than the other. There are many possible targets one can use when running make. For the ports collection, poke around in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk to see what many interesting targets will do. A make target starts at the beginning of a line in a makefile and in punctuated by a colon. sometarget: optional-subtarget another-subtarget Later, Jason C. Wells ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: method for installing ports
--- Jonathan Horne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ive read many many guides found all over the net in the past few days, and they can never seem to agree on the way a port is installed. I see these methods: Make install Installs a port and any needed build dependencies. Make install clean Same as above but removes the uncompressed source code. Make install distclean Same as above but removes the distribution files (the compressed source code). Do this if you will be building on some other architecture or if you will never use the source code again. What is the difference between the 3, and are there legitimate times when one is preferred over the other? __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: method for installing ports
Thanks to you both! That defiantly clears it up, and explains some of the behavior ive seen when I go back to redo something from ports ive already done :) Cheers, jonathan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:40 PM To: Jonathan Horne; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: method for installing ports --- Jonathan Horne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ive read many many guides found all over the net in the past few days, and they can never seem to agree on the way a port is installed. I see these methods: Make install Installs a port and any needed build dependencies. Make install clean Same as above but removes the uncompressed source code. Make install distclean Same as above but removes the distribution files (the compressed source code). Do this if you will be building on some other architecture or if you will never use the source code again. What is the difference between the 3, and are there legitimate times when one is preferred over the other? __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
