Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 00:12:44 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>, "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: <20121025221244.GG3808@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <CADLo839EUTF9bP8VD3L1_boY8i-w8B87yHGRR7Zx6wONFnSnEQ@mail.gmail.com> 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> <CAGH67wRw_n2_KwVz=DZkMpeJ4t8mMf965nxehHsDV-mzTnn5cA@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo839EUTF9bP8VD3L1_boY8i-w8B87yHGRR7Zx6wONFnSnEQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--c7hkjup166d4FzgN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:01:27PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote: > On 25 October 2012 22:32, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> w= rote: > > > > ... > > > >> 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. >=20 > Now you've terrified me, and probably most other ports people too. >=20 > 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. >=20 Not much test has been done on the ports tree about it, from what I have te= sted so far, except from the :tu :tl difference the ports seems to work ootb with both bmake and make, I asked obrien to MFC the support for :tl :tu in make(= 1) to all available platform which he did. Do be able to get the ports tree working with bmake asap, I also asked him = to MFC it to 9.1, from latest reply he got positive answer from re@ about this= , but was waiting for something I don't remember. regards, Bapt --c7hkjup166d4FzgN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlCJuVwACgkQ8kTtMUmk6Ez5MACgtT94YHosRKnm/ooojZVnDR0o egcAn0D+MzR3JshGijfnC244TDP0Ay1s =19Jx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --c7hkjup166d4FzgN--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121025221244.GG3808>