Stuart Henderson <st...@openbsd.org> writes: > On 2013/06/23 21:39, Jan Stary wrote:
[...] >> Does this mean that having xetc is required for running ports? >> Have I missed somewhere in the documentation? > > Yes, I'm not sure if this is specifically mentioned in documentation > yet, but building ports is only supported when the entire base OS is > installed (i.e. all sets including xenocara). > > At the very least this should be added to DIAGNOSTICS in bsd.port.mk(5) > (and remove the "<PORTSDIR> is a symlink", since this check has been > removed from infrastructure). There are two checks actually. I hope the use of .br here is kosher. Index: bsd.port.mk.5 =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man5/bsd.port.mk.5,v retrieving revision 1.378 diff -u -p -r1.378 bsd.port.mk.5 --- bsd.port.mk.5 21 Jun 2013 13:06:54 -0000 1.378 +++ bsd.port.mk.5 23 Jun 2013 22:36:04 -0000 @@ -3061,15 +3061,6 @@ resulting in a double inclusion. This would lead to weird results, such as .Ev PKG_ARGS being defined twice. -.It "Fatal: <PORTSDIR> is a symlink. Please set to the real directory" -A few ports get lost if -.Pa /usr/ports -points elsewhere. -You should set -.Ev PORTSDIR -in -.Pa /etc/mk.conf -to the real location of the ports directory. .It "Fatal: SUBPACKAGES should always begin with -: <offending list>" That is the only way to differentiate between .Ev FLAVOR @@ -3078,6 +3069,12 @@ and in .Xr pkgpath 7 specifications. +.It "Fatal: building ports requires correctly installed X11" +.br +.It "Fatal: /usr/local/lib/X11/app-defaults should exist and be a symlink" +.br +All file sets of the base OS (including xenocara) must be installed +before building ports. .It "Fatal: the licencing info for <pkgname> is incomplete..." Every port must have explicit defines of all .Ev PERMIT_*
