RFC: small patch to linux_base files for package building
Mark Linimon
Thus, the test for ${SYSCTL} -n compat.linux.osrelease might or might
not match the clients.
I want to put in the following patch in each of the Makefiles to be
able to force the INDEX (same patch for each one). Any objections?
Thanks.
mcl
Index: Makefile
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/pcvs/ports/emulators/linux_base-f10/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.60
diff -u -r1.60 Makefile
--- Makefile 2 Mar 2011 10:11:21 -0000 1.60
+++ Makefile 17 Jul 2011 02:38:49 -0000
@@ -122,7 +122,9 @@
.include <bsd.port.pre.mk>
+.if !defined(PACKAGE_BUILDING) || (defined(PACKAGE_BUILDING) && !defined(LINUX_OSRELEASE) )
LINUX_OSRELEASE!= ${ECHO_CMD} `${SYSCTL} -n compat.linux.osrelease 2>/dev/null`
+.endif
.if ${LINUX_OSRELEASE}x == "x"
IGNORE= linuxulator is not (kld)loaded
_______________________________________________
freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-emulation
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-emulat...@freebsd.org"
--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-...@muc.de
Alexander Leidinger
wrote:
> pointyhat makes its INDEX file elsewhere from the client environment.
> Thus, the test for ${SYSCTL} -n compat.linux.osrelease might or might
> not match the clients.
>
> I want to put in the following patch in each of the Makefiles to be
> able to force the INDEX (same patch for each one). Any objections?
Whatever helps you.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
Gabor Kovesdan
> pointyhat makes its INDEX file elsewhere from the client environment.
> Thus, the test for ${SYSCTL} -n compat.linux.osrelease might or might
> not match the clients.
>
> I want to put in the following patch in each of the Makefiles to be
> able to force the INDEX (same patch for each one). Any objections?
>
see this code as part of bsd.port.mk as I proposed in ports/135221:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/135221
It would result in cleaner Makefiles and less duplicated code to put the
logic into bsd.port.mk and conditionally disable the check there.
Gabor Kovesdan
Mark Linimon
> No strong objection from me, however, I would definitely be happier
> to see this code as part of bsd.port.mk as I proposed in
I agree that this should be tested ... but there is a lot of code there
that I didn't have time to puzzle through for my current -exp run.
If the stanzas in the ports go away, then my hack goes away as well :-)
Consider it temporary in the meantime.
fwiw, right now it only affects pointyhat-west, which is currently
only being used for -exp runs. However, sometime soon I want to
start using it for regular builds. There are still a few bugs to
work out.
mcl
Doug Barton
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:12:03PM +0100, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
>> to see this code as part of bsd.port.mk as I proposed in
Doing it properly in bpm does indeed seem preferable.
> I agree that this should be tested ... but there is a lot of code there
> that I didn't have time to puzzle through for my current -exp run.
>
> If the stanzas in the ports go away, then my hack goes away as well :-)
> Consider it temporary in the meantime.
Unfortunately our "temporary" hacks seem to have a habit of becoming
less so over time. Doing it properly in the first place helps nip that
in the bud.
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/