From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 2 21:32:31 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 758F6106566C for ; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 21:32:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanefbsd@gmail.com) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 298F58FC0A for ; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 21:32:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 3so817930qwe.7 for ; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:32:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=A8BfTA4++mioJswtN5kg8rtLB3PikQtPFIWu0aqikXU=; b=kjFhWUTfReXHBgeJKtv1uHSmYsSS7lw5pCwPIoyFIjTXlII58n+mx3isvRJAHhMtWB CZCfkt2RrME4Up8i5gp/rXb8OSWR4vhKW/iU5s8uc+eB2wj4WlpGgYTY5J28YhoLQkrB 4j23jw5WKftQEoC21VpIouHlWavCmlHZXJM+A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=e2Rri8veXpuOiA4tm3YFD/LcVw9osOCgA0wp1HpHivgNWbnVoRZBWn2/NvtC2eyykZ dUjSZo7FOCnC4kYBl3EfRk/sCpgKb2lpn36eL6m2udcZ+92rywSAYTaKZjtt4H/6y4Wo bQW91CM6JRkLWzgLTG0pceBCUauW62KNrKqvs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.33.72 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 14:32:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100402084640.GB19647@lonesome.com> References: <4BA7E0B8.3080406@delphij.net> <4BAE2B4F.6060005@protected-networks.net> <4BB3FD5D.9070600@uffner.com> <86tyrvs3js.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100402084640.GB19647@lonesome.com> Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 14:32:29 -0700 Received: by 10.229.91.11 with SMTP id k11mr2600748qcm.50.1270243950025; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:32:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Mark Linimon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag=2DErling_Sm=F8rgrav?= , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: zlib updated [svn commit: r205471 - in head: . lib/libz lib/libz/contrib lib/libz/doc sys/sys] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 21:32:31 -0000 2010/4/2 Mark Linimon : > On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 03:30:47PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: >> And yes, I *will* keep harping on this until people Get It. > > You're harping at the wrong people. =A0Complain to the application author= s, > not to the poor slobs trying to maintain the ports collection. > > There's a lot of crap code out there on the internet. =A0If we want to > insist that all the application authors both a) write good code and that > b) understands how FreeBSD does things, well, we can do that, but it's > not going to have much effect. > > Probably 75%+ of the application authors neither know nor care that > their code is being run on anything other than Linux. =A0In extreme > cases we've enountered authors who outright refuse to accept our > patches, either due to philosophical disagreement or just due to the > xtra hassle. The problem actually was most likely the fact that the functionality wasn't properly documented or that people didn't thoroughly read or understand the documentation before implementing the feature. If there's anything that I've learned from cleaning up messes in the past (to be fair, some which I've created as well), it's that a lot of incorrect logic is created by misunderstanding things and/or making false assumptions on how things should work. But yes, zlib is buggy w.r.t. the item Xin Li mentioned and needed to be fixed. Too many folks try to resolve application porting issues by using inline: #ifndef SOME_LARGELY_USED_CONSTANT_INTRODUCED_IN_VERSION_B /* #define a constant or typedef a feature */ #endif This generally quasi-works in versions A (assuming the application runs and the developer upstream did their testing on version A's software... heh) or version C (typically a Linux) developer decided that they wanted to change the definition and dashed the consequences about backwards compatibility in their code. kernel.org sources are riddled with this kind of `decision making'. But I digress... -Garrett