Created attachment 143986 [details] proposed patch Perl shouldn't be a hard dependency only for two additional scripts that NTP ships these days. While there, clean up the Makefile consistently.
Will review.
Another batch of similar changes went in and I am kind of annoyed. Can we get this done please?
Created attachment 144396 [details] rebased diff on top of latest changes
Cy, I already monkeyed with this port today. I'm willing to take care of this PR if you'd like.
(In reply to Adam Weinberger from comment #4) > Cy, I already monkeyed with this port today. I'm willing to take care of > this PR if you'd like. The Per5 part is OK but it's the other changes that I have a problem with. Why remove ntpsnmpd? I will look at this before Wednesday.
Created attachment 144405 [details] PERL / NTPSNMPD only Thanks for your review. Let's make the patch clearer. Here is the PERL option and NTPSNMPD cleanup only. NTPSNMPD already has a file in pkg-plist, it makes sense to move the binary as well. `pre-everything' target can be removed as NTPSNMPD_LIB_DEPENDS takes care of proper dependency tracking. I can split this up further if needed.
Ping. :)
Approved. Will commit.
A commit references this bug: Author: cy Date: Sun Jul 13 05:28:17 UTC 2014 New revision: 361654 URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/361654 Log: Remove perl as a hard dependency. Move ntpsnmpd PLIST from Makefile to pkg-plist. PR: 191235 Changes: head/net/ntp-devel/Makefile head/net/ntp-devel/Makefile.inc head/net/ntp-devel/pkg-plist
Option now is `PERL_UTILS' while pkg-plist still uses `PERL'. Are you sure that's correct? What's the benefit of using PERL_UTILS, when the usual convention is to use PERL for Perl-related stuff? Why break this idiom? Why make it harder for the unskilled ports users? And then, should PERL_UTILS really be in charge of pulling in lang/perl5? It seems unreasonable as a run-only dependency. That's really all I worry about: avoiding to pull in perl5 for such a small portion of a small port.