Overly restrictive checks in the make process

[Bill Moran]

Kent Stewart <kstewart at owt.com> wrote:
>
> On Friday 20 July 2007, Mark Linimon wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 04:07:49PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> > > Even better would be for make to realize that it's only doing the
> > > fetching, and do it anyway.
> >
> > That still doesn't help with the problem of a user who starts a 10MB
> > download that won't work on his architecture or OS release.  The code
> > is all the same.  This is the aggravation we are trying to prevent.
> 
> That still doesn't address the concern or improve the system downtime 
> that a pkg_delete, make install allows. If you can't run something, you 
> don't have any downtime but to have to pkg_delete before you start the 
> tarball fetch can be really long on some ports.

It's certainly a tradeoff.  Either way you do it, there are practical
scenarios where a user is inconvenienced.

Perhaps an environmental override is the best route.  NO_IGNORE=yes
or something similar?

-- 
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.

wmoran at collaborativefusion.com
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023