From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 8 09:53:03 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8189953B for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2013 09:53:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oliver@freebsd.org) Received: from avocado.salatschuessel.net (avocado.salatschuessel.net [78.111.72.186]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA6CE2503 for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2013 09:53:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 50529 invoked by uid 80); 8 Sep 2013 09:52:53 -0000 Received: from dsdf-4db5f100.pool.mediaWays.net (dsdf-4db5f100.pool.mediaWays.net [77.181.241.0]) by avocado.salatschuessel.net (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Sun, 08 Sep 2013 11:52:53 +0200 Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2013 11:52:53 +0200 Message-ID: <20130908115253.Horde.idQUkFxUdsyF3rNQX9eeBA2@avocado.salatschuessel.net> From: Oliver Lehmann To: Alexey Dokuchaev Subject: Re: svn commit: r326685 - in head: devel/mercator math/wfmath References: <201309072043.r87KhjYi068970@svn.freebsd.org> <20130908033306.GA54749@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20130908033306.GA54749@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H5 (6.1.4) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2013 09:53:03 -0000 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > This is notoriously bad commit message. In fact, it's almost as bad as an > empty one. > unclear is 1) what kind of error this commit is supposed to fix; USE_GCC was introduces because: It requires a gcc compiler to compile. Next time I'll think more about the message to make this more clear. > 2) why is it hard to create a proper patch instead; Why? I can't tell, I'm sorry - I just was not able to fix the clang compilation problems otherwise. > 3) is it really necessary to set USE_GCC to "yes", not "any"? This is what the header of bsd.gcc.mk suggests. If "any" is prefered over "yes", it should be stated somewhere in the top of bsd.gcc.mk - maybe in the Examples section which is where I always look first. Greetings, Oliver