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
portlint && port test
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rP FreeBSD ports repository
- Lint
No Lint Coverage - Unit
No Test Coverage - Build Status
Buildable 4160 Build 4203: arc lint + arc unit
Event Timeline
misc/unclutter-xfixes/Makefile | ||
---|---|---|
17 | 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 | ||
19 | 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) |
Replace CONFLICTS with CONFLICTS_INSTALL.
Use $LOCALBASE instead of hardcoded /usr/local.
misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
---|---|---|
19 | Why not use direct CFLAGS+=-I${LOCALBASE}/include in port Makefile? |
misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
---|---|---|
19 | Yes, you could do that. The CPPFLAGS thing is probably more to do with automake generated Makefiles |
misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
---|---|---|
19 | 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. | |
28 | 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. | |
39–42 | You don't need to patch uninstall, it will never be used. |
Updating D6785: [NEW PORT] misc/unclutter-xfixes
Use PORTVERSION instead of constant.
Updating D6785: [NEW PORT] misc/unclutter-xfixes
Remove now unneeded INSTALL variable.
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 | ||
---|---|---|
16–17 | You don't need to remove the line. |
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?
Needs BUILD_DEPENDS=a2x:textproc/asciidoc for the manpage, testbuilds are OK, portlint is fine as well.
misc/unclutter-xfixes/Makefile | ||
---|---|---|
14 | It needs BUILD_DEPENDS= a2x:textproc/asciidoc |
misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
---|---|---|
16 | Removing that line is not needed. |
misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
---|---|---|
16 | 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 | ||
---|---|---|
16 | When you pass a variable as an argument to the make command, it overrides the variable defined in the Makefile. |
Updating D6785: [NEW PORT] misc/unclutter-xfixes
Restore line form original Makefile.
misc/unclutter-xfixes/files/patch-Makefile | ||
---|---|---|
16 | You are right, reverted. |