1. Forum
  2. USENET
  3. muc.lists.freebsd.ports

  • PORTSCOUT= position in port Makefile

    From Don Lewis@truckman@FreeBSD.org to muc.lists.freebsd.ports on Fri Jun 5 23:33:14 2026
    From Newsgroup: muc.lists.freebsd.ports

    Two chapters of the FreeBSD Porter's Handbook discuss the ordering of
    the variables in the port Makefile:
    Chapter 5. Configuring the Makefile
    https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/makefiles/

    Chapter 15. Order of Variables in Port Makefiles
    https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/order/

    PORTSCOUT is mentioned in Section 5.9:
    https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/makefiles/#makefile-portscout
    where is is shown following the LICENSE block.

    PORTSCOUT is not mentioned explicitly in Chapter 15, in which case
    15.11. The Rest of the Variables, should apply:
    "And then, the rest of the variables that are not mentioned in the
    previous blocks, placing PORTSCOUT right before the Targets."

    Portlint and portclippy both seem to prefer the Chapter 15 ordering.

    Neither position really makes sense to me. Since PORTSCOUT relates to
    the PORTVERSION, it makes the most sense to me to include it in the
    PORTNAME block.

    Thoughts?


    --
    Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
    Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-admin@muc.de
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Daniel Engberg@diizzy@FreeBSD.org to muc.lists.freebsd.ports on Sat Jun 6 08:55:05 2026
    From Newsgroup: muc.lists.freebsd.ports

    On 2026-06-06 08:33, Don Lewis wrote:
    Two chapters of the FreeBSD Porter's Handbook discuss the ordering of
    the variables in the port Makefile:
    Chapter 5. Configuring the Makefile
    https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/makefiles/

    Chapter 15. Order of Variables in Port Makefiles
    https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/order/

    PORTSCOUT is mentioned in Section 5.9:
    https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/makefiles/#makefile-portscout
    where is is shown following the LICENSE block.

    PORTSCOUT is not mentioned explicitly in Chapter 15, in which case
    15.11. The Rest of the Variables, should apply:
    "And then, the rest of the variables that are not mentioned in the
    previous blocks, placing PORTSCOUT right before the Targets."

    Portlint and portclippy both seem to prefer the Chapter 15 ordering.

    Neither position really makes sense to me. Since PORTSCOUT relates to
    the PORTVERSION, it makes the most sense to me to include it in the
    PORTNAME block.

    Thoughts?

    Neither of these tools are bulletproof and not expected to be. Portscout
    isn't related to the port metadata so I'd argue that below LICENSE block
    is fine and it makes less sense to traverse though a complete (port)
    Makefile to find it mixed in with build related variables. Below LICENSE
    block is also how most Makefiles used to define it and I think there's
    simply an oversight in Chapter 15.

    While one the topic, Portscout itself is falling more or less into obsolescence since it can't cope with various developer platforms and
    other "quirks". Perhaps add on the long list of many "todo"/"things that
    needs to be resolved" regarding the Ports tree list add move to
    nvchecker or similar tool which likely will use separate file

    See https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/curl/-/blob/main/.nvchecker.toml?ref_type=heads
    for example

    Best regards,
    Daniel


    --
    Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
    Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-admin@muc.de
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2