On Sun, Aug 06, 2023 at 12:06:22PM +0000, Klemens Nanni wrote: > On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 11:17:48AM +0200, Sebastien Marie wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 10:17:05PM +0000, Klemens Nanni wrote: > > > 'make patch' on a WXNEEDED=Yes port without wxallowed fails after > > > patching and before creating the patch cookie, so subsequent setting > > > of the option and rerunning the target will try to patch again. > > > > > > If the check is done right after extract, rerunning that target usually > > > has higher chances of just working. > > > > > > Is there a reason I'm not aware of that this is done after patch? > > > > > > > > > I just forgot to set wxallowed on /usr/ports/pobj when building > > > ungoogled-chromium where 'make clean && mount ... && make patch' takes > > > considerably longer than 'mount ... && make extract' to recover from > > > forgetting to set wxallowed. > > > > Personally, having it in extract step might be not convenient as extracting > > will > > require 'wxallowed', even if I just want to extract to look at source code. > > Good point. > > > Ideally, I would put such control code at start of 'configure' step. > > Doesn't "gen" also run GNU auto* which potentially needs wxallowed? > That's why I have moved it there now. > > Either way, making the check the first step of a target instead needs > its own target so that PORTS_PRIVSEP=Yes stays in effect. > > post-* or *-finalize where the first diff put it do not need that, as > they're already run as _pbuild. > > Does that still work for everyone's favourite USE_WXNEEDED=Yes workflow > without breaking other stuff, when you forget to set wxallowed?
If I recall correctly, adding USE_WXNEEDED predates the gen step by some time, so it might be good there days.
