On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:34:49AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> I'm going to do a bulk build with this to see if it shakes anything out.
> Any comments on whether it's worth committing?
>
> Index: bsd.port.mk
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk,v
> retrieving revision 1.1322
> diff -u -p -r1.1322 bsd.port.mk
> --- bsd.port.mk 6 Sep 2016 10:31:12 -0000 1.1322
> +++ bsd.port.mk 17 Oct 2016 08:34:27 -0000
> @@ -2469,6 +2469,16 @@ ${_WRKDIR_COOKIE}:
> .if !empty(WRKDIR_LINKNAME)
> @ln -sf ${WRKDIR} ${.CURDIR}/${WRKDIR_LINKNAME}
> .endif
> +# poison some common gettext-tools binaries
> +.if !defined(BUILD_DEPENDS) || !${BUILD_DEPENDS:Mdevel/gettext-tools}
> + printf '#!/bin/sh\n\
> + echo "*** $$0 was called without gettext-tools dependency ***"
> >&2\n\
> + exit 1\n' > ${WRKDIR}/bin/msgfmt
> + chmod 555 ${WRKDIR}/bin/msgfmt
> +. for name in msgcat msginit
> + @ln -sf msgfmt ${WRKDIR}/bin/${name}
> +. endfor
> +.endif
> @${_MAKE_COOKIE} $@
>
> ${_EXTRACT_COOKIE}: ${_WRKDIR_COOKIE}
Good idea. Maybe we'll make that more independent in the future, but
for one tool, it's good.
I would probably prefer a pattern like
.for tool dep in msgfmt devel/gettext-tools msgcat devel/gettext-tools msginit
devel/gettext-tools
...
.endfor
but it's trivial to change later
