Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:07:38 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 280396] Mk/Uses/cmake.mk: Disallow USE_CSTD and USE_CXXSTD Message-ID: <bug-280396-7788-FaBrLycqSa@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-280396-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-280396-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D280396 --- Comment #9 from Daniel Engberg <diizzy@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Jason E. Hale from comment #7) Quirk is probably the wrong word for it, "hidden" feature is probably bette= r. Given the current status it's very easy to overlook let alone find it as Go= ogle or whatever search engine you perfer won't return something usable. Telling people to "by default" look at the source code is neither helpful, inviting= or productive. My point is that if the goal is make it tedious for people to utilize ports framework "properly" we're on the wrong path. If we look at the fallout there's quite a high amount (given the amount of ports utilizing it in tree) that gets this wrong and I'd argue that if we o= nly had one way defining the number would be much lower. Your mentioned examples also shows a pattern worth looking into, Looking at USE_LOCALE there seems to be ~30% or so of all ports doing somet= hing else than utilizing USE_LOCALE. USE_BINUTILS shows about 50% or possibly even more not using it in favour of BUILD_DEPENDS I'll try to wrap up the Part 2/3 later today (3/3 being the list already posted) and then tackle CSTD as time allows. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-280396-7788-FaBrLycqSa>