Subject: Re: substitutes framework ?
To: Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com>
From: Julio M. Merino Vidal <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/05/2005 12:13:59
On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 18:37 +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> Thanks all for the SUBST_* suggestion. It's exactly what I need.
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 11:31:05AM +0100, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> > BTW, use pre-configure as the stage, _not_ post-patch. This way, when
> > somebody does 'make patch' to later edit the patches manually, he won't
> > get any changes that are done automatically (which happens from time to
> > time, breaking existing patches).
> Good point. I've used pre-configure. BTW, I noticed some packages use
> post-patch for this :)
Yeah; we should fix those. But we need to be careful, specially because
several packages do NO_CONFIGURE=YES (which results in the substs not
beeing applied if the stage is pre-configure).
Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/