On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Johnny C. Lam wrote:

> > When creating new packages, should I not make any buildlink2.mk files and
> > should I not reference any buildlink2.mk when buildlink3.mk files are
> > available?
>
> You can continue to provide buildlink2.mk files if you wish, but when
> creating new packages, try to use buildlink3 whenever possible.

sysutils/file was missing zlib buildlink. So I used:

--- sysutils/file/Makefile	2003/07/21 17:24:14	1.4
+++ sysutils/file/Makefile	2004/02/05 01:18:06
@@ -9,10 +9,15 @@
 #HOMEPAGE=
 COMMENT=		Tool for determining file type

+PKG_INSTALLATION_TYPES=	overwrite pkgviews
+
+USE_BUILDLINK3= 	YES
 GNU_CONFIGURE=		YES
 CONFIGURE_ARGS+=	--enable-fsect-man5
 CONFIGURE_ARGS+=	--sysconfdir=${PKG_SYSCONFDIR}

 MESSAGE_SUBST+=		PKG_SYSCONFDIR=${PKG_SYSCONFDIR}
+
+.include "../../devel/zlib/buildlink3.mk"

 .include "../../mk/bsd.pkg.mk"



I haven't used pkgviews with this. But the above seemed to do the right
thing (which was use libz if needed).

Is it okay?

   Jeremy C. Reed
   http://www.reedmedia.net/