On Thu, 2005-08-18 at 11:55 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 18 August 2005 11:19 am, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> > I'm thinking about adding bsdmk to main tree and make ash/csh use it to
> > find pmake
>
> considering the number of packages that use pmake, why do you want an ecla
On Thursday 18 August 2005 21:33, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> then why not think bigger ... call it 'bsdeutils' or something rather than
> limiting yourself to bsd make
Because for a mk-based project (and fbsd/dfly/nbsd source packages) we can
just inherit bsdmk and src_compile and src_unpack are alre
On Thursday 18 August 2005 01:28 pm, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Thursday 18 August 2005 19:19, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > ok, but then you still have the fact that you're writting an eclass for a
> > single function ... isnt that the point of eutils ?
>
> A part eutils being polluted, whe
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 13:19:38 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Thursday 18 August 2005 12:09 pm, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
| > On Thursday 18 August 2005 17:55, Mike Frysinger wrote:
| > > considering the number of packages that use pmake, why do you
| > > want an eclass f
On Thursday 18 August 2005 19:19, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> ok, but then you still have the fact that you're writting an eclass for a
> single function ... isnt that the point of eutils ?
A part eutils being polluted, when pmake is used directly with bsd-style MK
definitions, bsdmk take care of most
On Thursday 18 August 2005 12:09 pm, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Thursday 18 August 2005 17:55, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > considering the number of packages that use pmake, why do you want an
> > eclass for it ? i'd say just put the logic in the ebuilds themselves
>
> Add all the ones we
On Thursday 18 August 2005 17:55, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> considering the number of packages that use pmake, why do you want an
> eclass for it ? i'd say just put the logic in the ebuilds themselves
Add all the ones we use on G/FBSD overlay, and the count increase :)
The eclass is currently in pla
On Thursday 18 August 2005 11:19 am, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> I'm thinking about adding bsdmk to main tree and make ash/csh use it to
> find pmake
considering the number of packages that use pmake, why do you want an eclass
for it ? i'd say just put the logic in the ebuilds themselves
Ok another problem with various makes on Gentoo/FreeBSD ...
Let's recap:
make command is aliased to 'gmake' to let use of GNU make on most situations
(while most of the autotools projects are fine with bsd make, a few uses
unportable syntax).
emake command calls gmake, as above
to run bsd make
