On 01/01/2011 11:44, b. f. wrote:
On 1/1/11, Doug Barton<do...@freebsd.org> wrote:
On 12/31/2010 18:40, b. f. wrote:
You don't need to go to those lengths. You could just add a
command-line switch, or a check for a cookie (.buildme or .nopkg, say)
in the corresponding PORT_DBDIR subdirector(y|ies), or both, to allow
the user to indicate to portmaster that it should always build the
port(s) in question, even if -P is used.
My preferences are for something that it's possible for other port tool
authors to use, and something that requires the minimal necessary steps
for the user. Since the OP is already editing knobs in ports.conf, and
since IMO either ports.conf or make.conf are easier to transport between
systems I think I'll give Matthew's idea a try first. :)
Whatever works, as long as it is not specific to ports-mgmt/portconf,
because many users may not use that port and yet still want to avoid
the use of packages for certain ports. Note that various Makefiles
(Makefile.{inc,local,${ARCH},${OPSYS}, and ${ARCH}-${OPSYS}}) can also
hold per-port defines that may have to be accounted for,
Right, which is another reason that doing 'make -V
PT_NO_INSTALL_PACKAGE' at the /usr/ports/category/portname level seems
like a good way to go.
and that
NO_PACKAGE may preclude your use of 'make package' with -g in
portmaster (at least without some workaround like FORCE_PACKAGE).
Different issue, the OP was concerned about using packages to install
all of his ports _except_ for the ones where he had defined options in
ports.conf.
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/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
