Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:10:16 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: cleanup of linux ports Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0504130954080.17340-100000@pancho> In-Reply-To: <20050413122034.0c3fsbwxusw0ss4w@netchild.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> wrote: > > > This logic also assumes that anything that isn't a partial portname > > or '7' should be the default. This seems wrong. IMHO after the > > test for '7' should be a test for 'yes', which sets whatever is the > > current default (currently 8). Any other value should set IGNORE. > > I did this because USE_LINUX was a trigger variable before. If set to any > value (even "no"), it triggered a dependency to the default linux base. It got changed not to be a pure trigger variable in 1.505, when the acceptable value '7' was added. Now we have the worst of both worlds. If it can have multiple values then we have to test for illegal values and reject them via IGNORE. Implicit in this is going and fixing the two current cases where the value is not 'yes'. Otherwise IMHO this is completely fragile. Again, consider what happens when someone sets 'USE_LINUX=rh-7' which they might reasonably expect to do since they can set it to 'rh-9'. It should fail, not silently give them RH 8. As well, I see this fragility as an opportunity to shoot ourselves in the foot when changing default versions in the future. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.44.0504130954080.17340-100000>