Subject: Re: WRKSRC's position in Makefiles, and pkglint
To: None <>
From: Alistair Crooks <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 01/19/2004 11:06:51
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 11:31:58AM +0100, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > I believe strongly that the WRKSRC definition really belongs in the
> > build information, and that the first paragraph should be reserved for
> > detailing the location of any distfiles, and pertinent information to
> > them.
> Since the WRKSRC is a property of the distfile and changes with
> it, it seems that even following your argument it belongs in the
> first section.

No, the first section has to do with the variables I listed:


i.e. the categories for the package, where the distfiles are located,
and what the distfiles are called.

WRKSRC is the name of the directory in the build area on a local
machine where files will get extracted to, and built from.  WRKSRC is
not a property of the distfile - I would bet that 99% of all of the
distfiles in pkgsrc have no idea what a "WRKSRC" is.  Rather, WRKSRC
derives its name from DISTNAME by default, but that is absolutely no
reason to put WRKSRC beside DISTNAME.

Additionally, the standard definition of WRKSRC in is
${WRKDIR}/${DISTNAME}.  The definitions of WRKSRC that I see in pkgsrc
Makefiles are for the exception to this rule, i.e. where the DISTNAME
is not normally part of the ${WRKSRC}.  So why should WRKSRC be next
to DISTNAME for these exceptions?

I really do not want the WRKSRC definition cluttering up the most
important information at the top of the pkgsrc makefile.

Alistair Crooks <>