Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 14:32:14 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program Message-ID: <CAGH67wRw_n2_KwVz=DZkMpeJ4t8mMf965nxehHsDV-mzTnn5cA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3F52B7C9-A7B7-4E0E-87D0-1E67FE5D0BA7@xcllnt.net> References: <CAGH67wRkOmy7rWLkxXnT2155PuSQpwOMyu7dTAKeO1WW2dju7g@mail.gmail.com> <201210020750.23358.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAGH67wTM1VDrpu7rS=VE1G_kVEOHhS4-OCy5FX_6eDGmiNTA8A@mail.gmail.com> <201210021037.27762.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAGH67wQffjVHqFw_eN=mfeg-Ac2Z6XBT5Hv72ev0kjjx7YH7SA@mail.gmail.com> <127FA63D-8EEE-4616-AE1E-C39469DDCC6A@xcllnt.net> <20121025211522.GA32636@dragon.NUXI.org> <3F52B7C9-A7B7-4E0E-87D0-1E67FE5D0BA7@xcllnt.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> wrote: ... > I think there are 2 reasons why not to: > > 1. The people working on ATF have not raised this concern and > have expressed that using the WITH_BMAKE knob is but a small > price to pay. So let's work the bmake side and be able to > get rid of the knob as soon as possible. It is annoying with the magnitude of build-related errors, but I have a workaround. > 2. More knobs isn't better -- we must have none of the knobs in > the end, so the more we create, the more work we have to get > rid of them. That's just more work spent not focusing on the > task at hand and thus more time wasted. Yes, but not being able to update one's machine makes me sad panda. > In short: this isn't a 2-knob problem by any stretch of the > imagination. The real issue is that I need to take the patch Simon developed, run with it, and in parallel he needs to -- and hopefully already is -- engage portmgr to get it through a number of exp- runs to make sure bmake does what it's supposed to do with his patch. Backwards compatibility will need to be maintained for ports because ports has to work on multiple versions of FreeBSD [where bmake isn't yet available/present], so maybe a fork in the road for bsd.port.mk should be devised in order to make everything work. Thanks! -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGH67wRw_n2_KwVz=DZkMpeJ4t8mMf965nxehHsDV-mzTnn5cA>