Add new port misc/unclutter-xfixes, a rewrite of the popular
tool unclutter, but using the x11-xfixes extension. This means that this
rewrite doesn't use fake windows or pointer grabbing and hence causes
less problems with window managers and/or applications.
Details
Details
portlint && port test
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rP FreeBSD ports repository
- Lint
Lint Not Applicable - Unit
Tests Not Applicable
Event Timeline
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 16 ↗ | (On Diff #17457) | Does this need to be CONFLICTS rather than CONFLICTS_INSTALL ? CONFLICTS says you can't even build this port if the conflicting software is installed. |
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
| 18 ↗ | (On Diff #17457) | You shouldn't assume the setting of $LOCALBASE as /usr/local here. That can be overridden in the same way that $PREFIX can. It's fairly common to set: CPPFLAGS=-I${LOCALBASE}/include in the port Makefile and then pass that to the build Makefile in the MAKEFLAGS, and make this line be CFLAGS += $(CPPFLAGS) |
Comment Actions
Replace CONFLICTS with CONFLICTS_INSTALL.
Use $LOCALBASE instead of hardcoded /usr/local.
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 18 ↗ | (On Diff #17457) | Why not use direct CFLAGS+=-I${LOCALBASE}/include in port Makefile? |
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 18 ↗ | (On Diff #17457) | Yes, you could do that. The CPPFLAGS thing is probably more to do with automake generated Makefiles |
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 18 ↗ | (On Diff #17458) | You don't need to patch the Makefile for that, adding it to CFLAGS will be enough, CFLAGS is added to MAKE_ENV, so it'll end up in there. |
| 27 ↗ | (On Diff #17458) | You should pass the version in MAKE_ENV and use it here, so that the patch doesn't have to change when updates are being made. |
| 38–41 ↗ | (On Diff #17458) | You don't need to patch uninstall, it will never be used. |
Comment Actions
Updating D6785: [NEW PORT] misc/unclutter-xfixes
Use PORTVERSION instead of constant.
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 15–16 ↗ | (On Diff #17469) | That's wrong too, not respecting ${CC}, you should add to the Makefile: MAKE_ARGS=CC=${CC} |
| 31 ↗ | (On Diff #17469) | use $(BSD_INSTALL_PROGRAM) instead of $(INSTALL) -s -m 0755 |
| 32 ↗ | (On Diff #17469) | use $(BSD_INSTALL_MAN) instead of $(INSTALL) -c -m 0644 |
Comment Actions
Updating D6785: [NEW PORT] misc/unclutter-xfixes
Remove now unneeded INSTALL variable.
Comment Actions
I'm wondering if patching the Makefile is really interesting, and it feels it would be faster to have a do-build and a do-install target in the port's Makefile
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 15–16 ↗ | (On Diff #17469) | You don't need to remove the line. |
Comment Actions
I agree with you. With five source files and two target files write custom do-build and a do-install steps will be faster. But now, port working and may be committed or I need to rewrite Makefile to use do-build and a do-install steps?
Comment Actions
Needs BUILD_DEPENDS=a2x:textproc/asciidoc for the manpage, testbuilds are OK, portlint is fine as well.
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 13 ↗ | (On Diff #17476) | It needs BUILD_DEPENDS= a2x:textproc/asciidoc |
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 15 ↗ | (On Diff #17542) | Removing that line is not needed. |
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 15 ↗ | (On Diff #17542) | That line replace $CC from MAKE_ARGS with hardcoded gcc. gcc is not in BUILD_DEPENDS for this port and should not be there. |
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 15 ↗ | (On Diff #17542) | When you pass a variable as an argument to the make command, it overrides the variable defined in the Makefile. |
Comment Actions
Updating D6785: [NEW PORT] misc/unclutter-xfixes
Restore line form original Makefile.
| misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
|---|---|---|
| 15 ↗ | (On Diff #17542) | You are right, reverted. |