From owner-svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 10 14:10:12 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BFD8D20; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from apnoea.adamw.org (apnoea.adamw.org [204.109.59.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1D431104; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:10:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.192.20] (dhcp-108-170-169-46.cable.user.start.ca [108.170.169.46]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by apnoea.adamw.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49F7C1214EC; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:10:10 -0500 (EST) From: "Adam Weinberger" To: "Baptiste Daroussin" Subject: Re: svn commit: r343559 - head/net-p2p/litecoin Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:10:06 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20140210101243.GX80056@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <201402092329.s19NTHiq089517@svn.freebsd.org> <20140210011718.GA79272@mouf.net> <20140210075232.GU80056@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20140210101243.GX80056@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.7.2r3905) Cc: svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.org, Steve Wills , svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.org, John Marino , David Chisnall , ports-committers@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:10:12 -0000 On 10 Feb 2014, at 5:12, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 09:47:17AM +0000, David Chisnall wrote: >> On 10 Feb 2014, at 07:52, Baptiste Daroussin >> wrote: >> >>> I do not think that requires an approval, as for FreeBSD this change >>> is no-op, >>> It is also no intrusive and just "fixes" building of that port for >>> Dragonfly. >> >> Relying on OPSYS and OSVERSION is pretty horrible and doesn't scale. >> Already we have problems with convoluted OSVERSION expressions that >> are hard to understand and really mean 'fix for PR12345 has been >> merged to the relevant branch'. It would be far better to centralise >> these into a single file for each platform, listing features / >> bugfixes / needed work-arounds and start removing explicit OSVERSION >> checks from any other Makefiles. If supporting Dragonfly is one of >> our objectives, then I'd strongly encourage the people who are >> working on it to engage in this kind of cleanup, rather than piling >> more hacks into the tree. >> >> David >> > > If one has a nice idea to centralize those informations I'm all about > it, by > nice idea I mean format and implementation. > > May that be OPSYS and/or OSVERSION both requires loading too many > times bsd.*.mk > which is not good, looking forward for propositions. > > regards, > Bapt pkgconf. It's ISC-licenced, has no external dependencies, and would be a great way to store information about the system itself. Instead of using magic to guess which compiler to use, a compiler.pc could tell you. The mayhem that ensued when the threading library changed years ago, a thread.pc would have made it a piece of cake. You could store capabilities in .pc files and have a single reliable way to retrieve it. # Adam -- Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org http://www.adamw.org