Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 19:31:36 -0500 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vendor import questions Message-ID: <20121005003136.GB84375@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <201209250841.34134.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20120924213137.GA76898@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <201209250841.34134.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--IiVenqGWf+H9Y6IX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 08:41:34AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > On Monday, September 24, 2012 5:31:37 pm Brooks Davis wrote: > > As part of switching to NetBSD's mtree I plan to import their versions > > of a few files that are part of libc (for example all the bits of > > vis/unvis). I would like to do that via a vendor import, but I'm unsure > > where to put the files and how to tag them. For mtree itself the right > > place is clearly base/vendor/NetBSD/mtree/dist, but we don't seem to > > have a good example for libc bits. > >=20 > > There is currently a base/vendor/NetBSD/dist directory containing a > > (very) partial source tree, but it seems to be unused in recent times. > > If I did import into that tree, the next question would be how to tag > > the import. The base/vendor/NetBSD/fparseln_19990920/ directory shows > > one seemingly sensible example, but I don't like the resulting explosion > > of top level directories. I also worry that having mixed versions in t= he > > libc directory would make any attempt at sensible merging difficult > > since we'd have to put mergeinfo on files. > >=20 > > An additional issue is where to put the files in the source tree. > > Precedent seems to favor direct copies to src/lib/libc/gen etc. In some > > ways I think the optimal solution would be to put the bits in contrib > > in feature specific directories like contrib/libc/vis, but that might > > be annoying for some consumers. That being said, the existence if > > src/include means you can't simply check out libc so it's probably ok to > > add more locations in the source tree for a good cause. > >=20 > > What's the right way to go here? >=20 > libc already has contrib bits (contrib/gdtoa). I think something like > contrib/NetBSD/libc/<foo> might be fine. The problem I have with just > 'contrib/libc' is that it is ambiguous. OTOH, the contrib/NetBSD/libc > path isn't too pretty either. One option would be to merge directly from > the vendor area into src/lib/libc. One other option might be to just > do src/contrib/vis if it is only for 'vis' files. I'm leaning towards src/contrib/libc-vis. That would also work well in vendor/NetBSD since I could do vendor/NetBSD/libc-vis/dist. -- Brooks --IiVenqGWf+H9Y6IX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFQbipnXY6L6fI4GtQRAk8sAKCgEdBSVKoPBY3X/cALH9Kac3IVLQCgqPrC 5Ib9BrqkByqsIk9ph77vEo0= =nzZf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IiVenqGWf+H9Y6IX--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121005003136.GB84375>