Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 07:23:09 +0100 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program Message-ID: <CADLo839fUd1i_uWM85h_ptbbvb5OnwHXqP9E_y1obR6nF0kLug@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20121026050130.GL35915@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <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> <20121025225353.86DA658094@chaos.jnpr.net> <20121026050130.GL35915@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 26 Oct 2012 06:01, "Konstantin Belousov" <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 03:53:53PM -0700, Simon J. Gerraty wrote: > > > > On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:01:27 +0100, Chris Rees writes: > > >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. > > > > There is no need/plan for two versions of bsd.port.mk, the patch I just > > mentioned, deals with older systems by detecting that bmake was not > > used, and using it (installing if need be). > > > > >Have you discussed this on ports@? > > > > I have not at least. > > This was discussed at the last couple of BSDCan's and dev summits. > > > > The original plan discussed at BSDCan a couple of years ago, was to > > allow bmake and the old make to cooexist for some time so that ports > > could continue to use the old make. > > > > At the last BSDCan we were told that wasn't an option - hence the patch > > to ports that was mentioned. > > > > FWIW the changes to 99.9% of the ports tree are trivial (:L -> :tl etc). > > The only interesting changes are to bsd.port.mk (the diff other than the > > above is 54 lines) they cover 2 things - dealing with old make as > > mentioned above, and man pages. The nested .for loops that deal > > with MLINKS are replaced with one line - this was safer that attempting > > to hack those .for loops to work with both makes. > > I am watching the serial for some time. Could please, someone, describe > why bmake cannot grow the compat features to be a drop-in replacement for > FreeBSD make, instead of patching all the trees ? > > In particular, why cannot the ':L' and ':U' support be added ? :U is already used by bmake for something else- I can't remember what, but I checked the man page last night :( Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo839fUd1i_uWM85h_ptbbvb5OnwHXqP9E_y1obR6nF0kLug>