On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:21:17AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > Hi, > > When installing bmake from ports, the binary ends up in /usr/local/bin > and our top-level Makefile doesn't check there: > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > index e89a5b1..35ade48 100644 > --- a/Makefile > +++ b/Makefile > _at__at_ -129,7 +129,7 _at__at_ TGTS+= ${BITGTS} > .ORDER: buildkernel reinstallkernel > .ORDER: buildkernel reinstallkernel.debug > > -PATH= /sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin > +PATH= /sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin > > > > bmake -m $PWD/share/mk buildkernel > > env: bmake: No such file or directory > > bmake: "/usr/img/freebsd/Makefile" line 136: warning: "/usr/bin/env -i PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin bmake __MAKE_CONF=/etc/make.conf -f /dev/null -V MAKEOBJDIRPREFIX dummy" returned non-zero status > > --- buildkernel --- > > --- buildkernel --- > > ERROR: Missing kernel configuration file(s) (NOIP). > > *** [buildkernel] Error code 1 > > > > Any objections against extending the PATH= in our top-level Makefile? I can't express how bad I think that idea is. You should be able to just use a full path to the installed bmake. I'm surprised you need -m. -- Brooks
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:56 UTC