Subject: Re: (new mk for packages using
To: Julio M. Merino Vidal <>
From: Juan RP <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 06/10/2004 10:14:55
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:54:06 +0200
"Julio M. Merino Vidal" <> wrote:

> It seems to me it could be better to have a "" makefile in
> databases/postgresql and another one in databases/mysql (no need to be in
> mk/; it has already a lot of files...), similar to what the python
> packages do.
> Even though...  for what grant suggested, like having exim3 use different
> databases (through USE_DB="mysql postgresql"), a file in mk makes sense
> (because it's providing a "general abstraction" for database support).
> If done this way, mk/ could simply need to inspect the variable
> value and then include databases/{mysql,postgresql}/ depending on
> it.  And the file in mk/ could only be used by packages accepting _both_
> databases.  Packages using only one could simply include the right
> directly...

Ok, I'll create the two files for postgresql and mysql for now. I
thought that one file could be easier to maintain, but probably I was wrong.

Last question, should the file have a variable to specify the default
package version? (like DB_PGSQL_DEFAULT in or just to use
the installed package?

	Juan RP <>

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD)