Lucas Hazel [2008-06-27 09:40]:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:30:47 +0200 Juergen Daubert <jue@jue.li> wrote:
[...]
I'd not call the file .arch but find a better name that reflects more what it really does, pulling in different settings to build the port. It should be read after pkgmk.conf so it would be possible to alter other variables like MAKEFLAGS for example.
One drawback of the .xxxx file approach is that a modification of pkgmk is required, but I tend to favor that solution.
Perhaps an alternative solution would be to have a .pkgmk.conf to allow the port to make extra changes that may be required, such as extra CFLAGS, MAKEFLAGS, and so on. For example, with compat32 stuff .pkgmk.conf could contain,
. /etc/pkgmk-compat32.conf
This would remove the need for PKGMK_ARCH and the case structure in my version of pkgmk.conf.
This could also allow a number of x86_64 ports that for example, have to have -fPIC set in their CFLAGS to have the same build script as the offificial ones as in those ports as the extra CFLAGS could be set in .pkgmk.conf rather than in build().
I prefer .arch. Looks like the least intrusive approach to me. So, I'm ACKing the patches you linked to in your original mail. Regards, Tilman -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?