From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 25 22:01:59 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 251A11DD; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 22:01:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7237D8FC12; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 22:01:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-bk0-f54.google.com with SMTP id jf20so1058049bkc.13 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:01:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=U+ka8Th8PrqAfpev8HG4moakD+5iK870o0aGuE2bTeA=; b=XjHJhbDYYRrkZ6VOlBFKeOwkzFmf7cg7QEY928+7UXFk3gR7fryrTHjpv4VZ0rncbA Y2CB+RUjpY2CpLUbI1mIE2iuu8vuEruIYJMBZmftu/+vWgfcCBkYWCwsyGRTPx1DIDDc aQZomAVz2ap6A/NS5XCgnHJO37yW3xnEDLVu/H5yPBpMt6za4vO35cwUm98zgoXXojQ7 f9GP9U/KaL6hh5dsrwiXrEBhL/MlK9AytnvCFlb7U/dV9T7lNbGWOhD8nxotg5zvlf1i Mjk73TrxHV+0tfXyIrj3y4M4L0UX5qPWFILO1HBDSvOM0JOjtjpP9xLniMmP1jA/+EvL E/zg== Received: by 10.204.150.213 with SMTP id z21mr6712030bkv.45.1351202517287; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:01:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: utisoft@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.50.197 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:01:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201210020750.23358.jhb@freebsd.org> <201210021037.27762.jhb@freebsd.org> <127FA63D-8EEE-4616-AE1E-C39469DDCC6A@xcllnt.net> <20121025211522.GA32636@dragon.NUXI.org> <3F52B7C9-A7B7-4E0E-87D0-1E67FE5D0BA7@xcllnt.net> From: Chris Rees Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:01:27 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5m662tMYgFMHAbnup1v-4ks_kk0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program To: Garrett Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, "Simon J. Gerraty" , Marcel Moolenaar X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 22:01:59 -0000 On 25 October 2012 22:32, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Marcel Moolenaar 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. Now you've terrified me, and probably most other ports people too. Is there a Wiki page where the actual benefits of moving to bmake are made clear? This is a major, *major* upheaval, and having two versions of bsd.port.mk for years is simply not an option. Have you discussed this on ports@? Chris