On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 08:25:55PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> This comes up often enough that I think it's worth adding to bsd.port.mk
> rather than handling with custom commands. ok?
I love the idea.
I would prefer an if !empty() rather than defined and have it always defined.
It will also need a bit of love in sqlports, though there is already some
list of files for Makefiles (I can do that once it's commited)
> Index: ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk,v
> retrieving revision 1.1549
> diff -u -p -r1.1549 bsd.port.mk
> --- ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk 20 Feb 2021 18:05:04 -0000
> 1.1549
> +++ ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk 25 Feb 2021 20:23:27 -0000
> @@ -2688,6 +2688,9 @@ _post-extract-finalize:
> .endfor
> .if ${FIX_EXTRACT_PERMISSIONS:L} == "yes"
> @chmod -R a+rX ${WRKDIR}
> +.endif
> +.if defined(FIX_CRLF_FILES)
> + @cd ${WRKSRC} && perl -i -pe 's/\r$$//' ${FIX_CRLF_FILES}
> .endif
>
> # run as _pbuild
> Index: src/share/man//man5/bsd.port.mk.5
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man5/bsd.port.mk.5,v
> retrieving revision 1.537
> diff -u -p -r1.537 bsd.port.mk.5
> --- src/share/man//man5/bsd.port.mk.5 4 Feb 2021 22:12:03 -0000 1.537
> +++ src/share/man//man5/bsd.port.mk.5 25 Feb 2021 20:23:06 -0000
> @@ -1842,6 +1842,11 @@ to world-readable at the end of
> Used for some distfile contents which have paranoid permissions for no
> reason.
> Defaults to
> .Sq \&No .
> +.It Ev FIX_CRLF_FILES
> +Names of files with line endings that need to be corrected after extraction.
> +Sometimes a port will include files with MS-DOS line endings,
> +to avoid problems with patches (especially when sent by email)
> +these should be corrected.
> .It Ev FLAVOR
> The port's current options.
> Set by the user, and tested by the port to activate wanted functionalities.
>
>
Somewhat incomplete... it needs to be referenced in
extract like FIX_EXTRACT_PERMISSIONS is.
And the wording is not clear "at the end of extract" is also
what FIX_EXTRACT_PEMISSIONS says. And it's way cleared than "after extraction"
