Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 15:20:52 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <netchild@freebsd.org> To: Johannes Jost Meixner <johannes@meixner.or.at> Cc: AllanJude@freebsd.org, rene@freebsd.org, dchagin@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFH] Allan's 64bits CentOS ports Message-ID: <20150701152052.Horde.XdxXFlk6nCjUyNqwVIVyVQ9@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <55937245.3050609@meixner.or.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This message is in MIME format and has been PGP signed. --=_3aWGfFcnjRh72nuTOkd0XPh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Quoting Johannes Jost Meixner <johannes@meixner.or.at> (from Wed, 01=20=20 Jul=202015 07:53:25 +0300): > Allan could use some help reviewing his suite of CentOS 6.6 64bit ports. > > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D1746 I had a quick look at comments on the top of the page and the diffs of=20= =20 bsd.linux-apps.mk=20and bsd.port.mk. What I'm missing here (I may have overlooked it, it's the first time I=20= =20 have=20a look at reviews.freebsd.org) is a short explanation for the=20=20 rationale=20of the design decissions (see my questions below). The very first questions which come to my mind are: - Why is this embeded into the existing ports instead of having it=20=20 as=20seperate ports? - Would seperate 64bit ports make the infrastructure less=20=20 convoluted/complicated=20(KISS)? Yes, more ports, but the Mk=20=20 infrsatructure=20is already at a complexity level where not much people=20= =20 are=20willing to touch it, and with this I fear it will be just too much. - Can I install 64bit and 32bit in parallel with this approach (I=20=20 have=20to admit, it depends if the 64bit linuxulator is going to a=20=20 different=20or the same /compat/linux directory but I haven't checked=20=20 that,=20and it depends on how centos is build in this regard, so no idea=20= =20 if=20this makes sense)? - Is it a good idea to play around with the portname here (ok, this=20=20 fits=20into the first question)? My concern here is that some ports=20=20 played=20around with the port name in the past and got slowly converted=20= =20 to=20something without the name-mangling because we learned that it was=20= =20 not=20a good idea. Apart from that I have to admin that I don't like that=20=20 OVERRIDE_LINUX_BASE_PORT=20is used to check for 32bit or 64bit installs=20= =20 of=20the linux base. IMO it makes more sense to have a sort of "I want=20= =20 to=20have a XXbit linuxulator" variable: would be more end-user friendly=20= =20 and=20better self-explaining code (related to KISS). > What I'd like to see is, moving the Mk/ infrastructure to the point > where it can support future, upcoming architectures -- think CentOS 7, > recent Fedora version (only the ones that are supported for more than > 6 months), etc. > > I saw a working port of CentOS7 on GitHub, and a working Port of > Fedora 19 somewhere... but I don't recall the links. Check Can someone dig out the link for the CentOS7 port? 24th to 26th there=20=20 is=20the DevSummit in Essen/Germany and I thought about the possibility=20= =20 to=20have a look at CentOS7 ports (if I don't find something less=20=20 painful=20to work on) and it doesn't make sense to re-invent the wheel. Bye, Alexander. --=20 http://www.Leidinger.net=20Alexander@Leidinger.net: PGP 0xC773696B3BAC17DC http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild@FreeBSD.org : PGP 0xC773696B3BAC17DC --=_3aWGfFcnjRh72nuTOkd0XPh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: Digitale PGP-Signatur Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAABCAAGBQJVk+k0AAoJEDPaGvaaHuONJkcP/107IZyzAaSDGd+P6fDL1PaL DXSu+OygGsFMXgv5kugQlemeSHUx2vAOelpJd8NsbmZmEVawolhvSccPlbzgW3Vl rl6kqLLstz8U0RRSdAXUiX7IZb1oNyzguVtuQfB0qVX+xp2sZDaFLFrtCoOioNZe NUDhAXgBDRRa4id7oTep7AzIUhf9Mj8e3pLockDaTnb9fdk3jhzKB6YGZHnSXpZh jEaodvYmxvqCJoIlK70fmON1xWZpN+IzMfYYdQFMOk4lemejcPW1bjFMZ+k95pLN ARWIjc9RZ5jqLEme8i23lRTjcZYmUkZC4s3Mpz0eQg0aw0v5cTI9SjHgE6Z1RccS lG+IwMlRtTV8jHXDazWHl7JA512iwM76GsUo2OVJ3u7JujT66tpwio1oKXz241Gn JiL9G18GCSLkyqtoHNHaZg7hAaIXr1D9K5eYSros0aNH5B8leAM7ODy6ZZdB/Xnh UJrEdhrY7ITAxGD8i+pztlud+tTcLsHIelbX9QVdSQ/+BA0ntKaZot6G4DD3RI/d IgM6ZWGUWCX8pPXpJft73GgS5fxqni+Szj5+uLLH5eGUjj+WiVq9YkdaiVKG7Rah AckHuSPVg8rTUGBGMRX5AsU8ebBB5mn12RgKgvOaiSFUJIptwtEpxoPyj9Tq3EH1 Bnx9mjaXS3sRYkL5n7kf =cC4z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_3aWGfFcnjRh72nuTOkd0XPh--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150701152052.Horde.XdxXFlk6nCjUyNqwVIVyVQ9>