Bug 44396

Summary: Section 15.1 of the Porter's Handbook is no longer applicable
Product: Documentation Reporter: Adam Weinberger <adamw>
Component: Books & ArticlesAssignee: freebsd-doc (Nobody) <doc>
Status: Closed FIXED    
Severity: Affects Only Me    
Priority: Normal    
Version: Latest   
Hardware: Any   
OS: Any   
Attachments:
Description Flags
file.diff none

Description Adam Weinberger freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2002-10-22 23:40:02 UTC 
	Section 15.1 of the Porter's Handbook instructs people to create a post-install:
	target to strip binaries if the port doesn't do it. However, INSTALL_PROGRAM does
	this automatically, and that macro is described in the very next section.

Fix: Whack section 15.1 of the Porter's Handbook.

root@smacky:/usr/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook# diff -u book.sgml.orig book.sgml
Comment 1 Tom Hukins freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2002-10-24 20:59:19 UTC 
Adam,

From an SGML perspective, your patch looks fine.  INSTALL_PROGRAM
strips binaries, but are you sure there are no special cases when
binaries might be installed some other way?  I'm not familiar enough
with Ports to be certain this is the case.

If you're happy that the patch is technically correct, feel free to
commit it, although be sure to "make lint" after applying the patch.
I'm also happy to commit this, if you'd prefer.

Tom
Comment 2 Adam Weinberger freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2002-10-24 21:40:07 UTC 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

>> (10.24.2002 @ 1259 PST): Tom Hukins said, in 0.4K: <<
> From an SGML perspective, your patch looks fine.  INSTALL_PROGRAM
> strips binaries, but are you sure there are no special cases when
> binaries might be installed some other way?  I'm not familiar enough
> with Ports to be certain this is the case.

If somebody is making a port complex enough that they cannot use the
INSTALL_PROGRAM macro, they will know enough to figure out how to strip
it themself.

The section could stay around, and just become a Don't... "Don't strip
unless you have to."

> If you're happy that the patch is technically correct, feel free to
> commit it, although be sure to "make lint" after applying the patch.
> I'm also happy to commit this, if you'd prefer.

Is the porter's handbook part of the ports commit bit or the doc commit
bit?

- -Adam

- --
Adam Weinberger
adam@vectors.cx
adamw@FreeBSD.ORG

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE9uFqno8KM2ULHQ/0RAno2AKCTvfqoOnhan+z0vWaB9XoX+1xWqwCgwXZK
DSHALjXglRFuUyLEjKp6oaQ=
=goAj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment 3 Tom Hukins freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2002-10-24 21:59:20 UTC 
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 01:40:07PM -0700, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> 
> If somebody is making a port complex enough that they cannot use the
> INSTALL_PROGRAM macro, they will know enough to figure out how to strip
> it themself.

I agree.  I still think it's worth reminding people that it needs to
be done, though.

> The section could stay around, and just become a Don't... "Don't strip
> unless you have to."

That makes sense.

> Is the porter's handbook part of the ports commit bit or the doc commit
> bit?

Technically it's part of the doc tree, although ports committers can
better determine the accuracy of its content.  Maybe someone else has
a more useful answer.

Tom
Comment 4 Tom Hukins freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2002-10-29 16:16:57 UTC 
State Changed
From-To: open->closed

adamw's commit in revision 1.249 deals with this problem