Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:25:34 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD current mailing list <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC]: m4 update Message-ID: <20091030102131.T91695@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20091029215312.GA34302@freebsd.org> References: <20091029215312.GA34302@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, Roman Divacky wrote: > hi > > I made a patch that updates our in-tree m4 to the version from OpenBSD. > Their version contains some gnu extensions and generally is modernized > and rewritten. > > The patch (you have to in src/usr.bin/m4 for it to apply): > > > http://vlakno.cz/~rdivacky/m4.patch > > > I added their ohash* implementation to the m4 subdir as it uses it. I > am not sure this is the correct way but it works for now. > > So the question is - do we want this at all? If so, is this the way we > want it? > > I am open to all comments, thank you! The only comment I have at this point is that this is a huge update to a somewhat fragile tool. It'll need a lot of testing before it should be comitted this way; not sure how many ports use this rather than gm4 or if they could be switched over after that. I'd at least ask portmgr for an exp run. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb It will not break if you know what you are doing.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091030102131.T91695>