On 2024/10/24 19:13, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> 24.10.2024 17:46, Stuart Henderson пишет:
> > On 2024/10/20 15:32, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> >>>> +
> >>>> +.if ${MODPY_TEST_LINK_SO:L} == "yes" && !empty(MODPY_TEST_LIBDIR)
> >>>> +MODPY_TEST_TARGET := for _dir in ${MODPY_TEST_LIBDIR:S,:, ,g}; do \
> >>>> + if [ -e $$$${_dir} ]; then \
> >>>> + cd $$$${_dir} && \
> >>>> + find . -name '*.so' -type f \
> >>>> + -exec ln -sf $$$${_dir}/{} ${WRKSRC}/{} \; ;\
> >>>> + fi; done; ${MODPY_TEST_TARGET}
> >>>> +.endif
> >>>
> >>> Looks fine make-wise, but I lack python experience to judge the approach
> >>> itself.
> >>>
> >>> I think you can do without double-escaping and prepending the target
> >>> variable
> >>> by using your own and using it fist, this way it looks a clearer; diff
> >>> below.
> >>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +
> >>>> # dirty way to do it with no modifications in bsd.port.mk
> >>>> .if empty(CONFIGURE_STYLE)
> >>>> . if !target(do-build)
> >>>
> >>> Since that is a default-off opt-in, I'm fine committing it and tweaking
> >>> in-tree.
> >>>
> >>> Feedback or OKs for either of the two diffs?
> >>
> >> None so far, we'll land this in a bit unless there's objection.
> >
> > Can I have a diff rather than a "either of two diffs" to look at
> > please?
>
> Sure, here's the same diff I sent out last time.
Thanks.
There was no simple diff in the "None so far, we'll land this in a bit
unless there's objection" email just quotes, so I want to make sure I
look at the right thing.
