Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 19:48:14 +0400 From: Eygene Ryabinkin <rea@freebsd.org> To: marino@freebsd.org Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, owner-ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, Erwin Lansing <erwin@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r334593 - in head/dns: bind96 bind96/files bind98 bind98/files bind99 bind99/files Message-ID: <Xb%2BLlYHUf6SHjMBln0EFwOJixVo@oWPesh4l9zh3TEEafuAJpu%2BpO6A> In-Reply-To: <529451E7.4010801@marino.st> References: <201311221341.rAMDfY3g002148@svn.freebsd.org> <01490d316b5dd7f01f1c843871542666@secure.marino.st> <2DEEB271-4795-4DF0-8F85-30316BA3070F@FreeBSD.org> <5291C8BD.3070109@marino.st> <20131126035339.GA43389@FreeBSD.org> <529451E7.4010801@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--J/zg8ciPNcraoWb6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 08:46:47AM +0100, John Marino wrote:
> On 11/26/2013 04:53, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 10:37:01AM +0100, John Marino wrote:
> >> I have attached a diff with the proposed changes covering all three
> >> ports. It's pretty straight-forward.
> >> =20
> >> .if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MREPLACE_BASE}
> >> -.if ${OSVERSION} >=3D 1000500
> >> +.if ${OPSYS} =3D=3D FreeBSD && ${OSVERSION} >=3D 1000500
> >=20
> > Given that OSVERSION is used extensively in the tree, I'm worrying that
> > adding these extra "${OPSYS} =3D=3D FreeBSD" checks will our makefiles =
less
> > readable. Wouldn't it make more sense to place this check somewhere in
> > single place, and define whatever OSVERSION that looks reasonable when
> > OPSYS =3D=3D FreeBSD instead of patching every port?
>=20
> There is a "discussion" about this on the portmgr list. Well, it's not
> really a discussion. I started it, bapt answered it once, and the
> portmgr stopped talking about it.
>=20
> As far as "less readable", that really should not be a concern at all.
> It is simply invalid to use OSVERSION without OPSYS since it's OPSYS
> specific.
What are the other OPSYS that FreeBSD ports collection should support?
If there are any that are really needed, then OPSYS must be combined
with OSVERSION, but if there is no strong current demand for that, it
is probably not the right time to add complexity to the Makefiles.
--=20
Eygene Ryabinkin ,,,^..^,,,
[ Life's unfair - but root password helps! | codelabs.ru ]
[ 82FE 06BC D497 C0DE 49EC 4FF0 16AF 9EAE 8152 ECFB | freebsd.org ]
--J/zg8ciPNcraoWb6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD)
iF4EABEIAAYFAlKUwr4ACgkQFq+eroFS7PsllwD/c+huJ6Dk1mq5ZOr9PrMlud6s
UUIAonMnCG+NQ17y9IQA/j7Y3gcvSB987dUxe2N5KFPV80nRbWJ0n7ueeJocla1a
=opUh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--J/zg8ciPNcraoWb6--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Xb%2BLlYHUf6SHjMBln0EFwOJixVo>