Don't ask me how this differs from bytebench, but it seems to be
different enough to warrant a seperate port.
PR: 5330
Submitted by: Andrey Zakhvatov <andy@icc.surw.chel.su>
* PKGNAME needs a version number
* DISTNAME useless
* use INSTALL_* macros.
* "mkdir -p" --> ${MKDIR}
* changed "BTW" to something non-native english speakers may understand.
It displays a part of a motor. The faster your X server is, the more
rpm you get ;-) Guess how many rpm's I got, when I started with X11
years ago .... 32 rpm with an ET4000 VGA card on a 386 4MB running
Interactive Unix ;-))
PLISTs.
Note: I know that this is going to break some symlinks and/or .so
includes, I will back some of these out as I run into these during
package building.
all the COMMENTs! No package names, no version numbers, no "this is
absolutix-3.1.2" type comments that have zero information contents.
Now, without any bad examples to follow, nobody has an excuse to import
a port with those kind of comments. :)
Phew! 238 ports modified!
- Temporary files are written into $TMPDIR (default /var/tmp)
(some 18MB of free space are required for the file system test).
- Results are stored into $RESULTDIR (default /tmp).
prevent the tests from running.
Do not try to compile the test programs, since the sources are not
being copied to the lib/bytebench directory by "make install".
(See: http://www.silkroad.com/bass/linux/bm.html for results ...)
This is another benchmark that tries to give a single performance
number, but without giving much thought to proper weighting of the
performance numbers. So: Please handle with care ...
Yes, I know the package files are missing, I need to hack it a
little more so that it installs the binaries and all the data files
in some place that won't be blown away by a "make clean" and compare
the results...for now, you can type "make test" to run the test and
go into the work/lmbench-1.0/Results subdirectory to see what it
measured.
(1) Took out INSTALL_MANPAGES (not necessary anymore, porter should
set NO_INSTALL_MANPAGES for not calling "make install.man")
(2) Replaced most of DEPENDS with EXEC_DEPENDS and LIB_DEPENDS. These
are the entries I used:
EXEC_DEPENDS:
unzip:${PORTSDIR}/archivers/unzip
gmake:${PORTSDIR}/devel/gmake
wishx:${PORTSDIR}/lang/tclX
xli:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/xli
gs:${PORTSDIR}/print/ghostscript
gunshar:${PORTSDIR}/archivers/gshar+gunshar
hfs:${PORTSDIR}/utils/hfs
rman:${PORTSDIR}/utils/rman
LIB_DEPENDS:
tiff\\.3\\.:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/tiff
jpeg\\.5\\.:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/jpeg
Xpm\\.4\\.:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/xpm
tcl\\.7\\.:${PORTSDIR}/lang/tcl
tk\\.3\\.:${PORTSDIR}/x11/tk
xview\\.1\\.:${PORTSDIR}/x11/xview-lib
Xaw3d\\.:${PORTSDIR}/x11/Xaw3d
mpeg\\.1\\.:${PORTSDIR}/graphics/mpeg-lib
xview\\.3\\.:${PORTSDIR}/x11/xview-lib
BLT\\.1\\.:${PORTSDIR}/x11/blt
There are still some dependencies I can't figure out what exactly
is needed. If your port still has DEPENDS in it, please check it out!
1. Make MASTER_SITES entries contain a trailing /. Garrett says that
assuming a '/' seperator between entries in MASTER_SITES and entries
in DISTFILES is a dangerous assumption. This will also be taken
out of bsd.port.mk.
2. General clean-up. Some of these Makefiles were a little grim.
Make sure they're all in sync with the sometimes rapidly changing
bsd.port.mk! :)
3. Some small configuration tweaks to keep them compiling under the
most recent 2.0 - some things seem to have broken along our road
to release.
