Subject: Re: Accurately determining PKGNAME in mk.conf
To: Joerg Sonnenberger <>
From: David Brownlee <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 07/31/2007 16:35:12
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 05:03:56PM +0200, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
>>> Why can't you just use the PKGPATH (e.g. via .CURDIR) like everyone
>>> else
>>> does?
>> Because that is ugly?  I'd much much rather have a "PKGDIR" variable
>> that tells me the package I'm building (x/y) than have to deduce that
>> from .CURDIR.
> That was not so much the point of the question :-) We can certainly
> provide PKGPATH much earlier, but the question was, if that is enough.

 	I believe that all of my current uses can be converted
 	across to PKGPATH, and its certainly a much easier value
 	to provide. Lets provide it before the inclusion of mk.conf.
 	Any dissent? :)

 		David/absolute       -- No hype required --