Subject: Re: pkgviews-ification of packages (was: Re: net/gtk-gnutella and
To: Lars Nordlund <lars.nordlund@hem.utfors.se>
From: Juan RP <juan@xtraeme.nopcode.org>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 11/18/2004 02:03:36
--Signature=_Thu__18_Nov_2004_02_03_36_+0100_aOe97wowjmsSAc=p
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:04:42 +0100
Lars Nordlund <lars.nordlund@hem.utfors.se> wrote:

> I believe that the INSTALLATION_DIRS variable is needed because this
> package is a bit sparse lacking its own Makefile containing installation
> directives creating neccessary directories??

That's the same than:

do-install:
	${INSTALL_DATA_DIR} ${PREFIX}/foo
...
 
> PKG_INSTALLATION_TYPES will tell the system that this package supports
> pkgviews.

Yeah.
 
> USE_BUILDLINK3 is needed for pkgviews to work. I think this package is
> ok for buildlink3. It is almost equal to pkgtools/pkg_chk so I that is
> inspiration.
 
You don't need USE_BUILDLINK3 to use pkgviews, this package
doesn't require a compiler, so it's fine as is.

> Most other packages are already of buildlink3 type so often the
> PKG_INSTALLATION_TYPES variable is enough.

Yes, most of them.

The problem comes when one package requires modules or something like this
found on ${LOCALBASE}, but using pkgviews ${PREFIX} is ${PREFIX}/${PKGNAME}
so the modules cannot be found, I can't remember exactly, but more or less
that's the current problem with pkgviews and some packages.

 

--Signature=_Thu__18_Nov_2004_02_03_36_+0100_aOe97wowjmsSAc=p
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFBm/ToypkLYVDran0RAnYWAJ9Oa7pkZoKgIum93HKCTfX48LXYGACfVej+
sIqNW///gNiByMB0wtyyt/Q=
=8piO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Signature=_Thu__18_Nov_2004_02_03_36_+0100_aOe97wowjmsSAc=p--