Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 15:37:05 -0400 From: Garance A Drosehn <gad@FreeBSD.org> To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@haven.freebsd.dk>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Maxim.Sobolev@portaone.com, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin Makefile Message-ID: <p06230921bf196f797746@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <21942.1123270246@phk.freebsd.dk> References: <21942.1123270246@phk.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 9:30 PM +0200 8/5/05, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >In message <200508051428.19181.jhb@FreeBSD.org>, John Baldwin writes: > >>> >I have an objections. rcs is useful thing for various administrative >>> >tasks as well (i.e. keeping track of config file revisions), therefore >>> >it is not quite a "toolchain" thing. >>> >>> You are free to keep local patches. >> >>You could always change this to NO_RCS instead and just add that to your >>nanobsd config file. Maybe a NO_SCM that turns off both rcs and cvs? > >Ideally we would have NO_FOO for any program FOO, but that would be >totally unmanageable, so the idea has been to use functional >categories rather than per program. > >If this is really a big deal for people I'll make it NO_RCS, but I >think we're discussion paint again now. Make it a functional category called NO_SCM, and have that cover CVS and RCS. I don't think RCS should be treated as if it's *only* there for the toolchain category. And I think we're as entitled to throw a little paint around as you are to declare the bikeshed already-built and imply that no one is allowed to comment on it. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@FreeBSD.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy, NY; USA
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06230921bf196f797746>