From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 22 10:41:12 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85DA51065674 for ; Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:41:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (smtp6.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1:3cd3:cd67:fafa:3d78]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF4A98FC16 for ; Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:41:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from seedling.black-earth.co.uk (seedling.black-earth.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1:fa1e:dfff:feda:c0bb]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0MAf3J4016720 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:41:03 GMT (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.2 smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk q0MAf3J4016720 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infracaninophile.co.uk; s=201001-infracaninophile; t=1327228863; bh=pTjwTh4CIIN0D0u9sE9O6td6B49aJ3m2FhwBbm+DYJ0=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=0G6iQEfQS0b0CuVopg7ljvVQ/qTgfDM1UT5MNcoP8rVB+gNeCrQwuzHETtU94EHn2 u8r+RGRZo7fERiQOz87Pf1LYBL53fu7RGG6WA0mB2zt1L+Tbfy8/2o87srCnaXkKBH 4wm+i/418lBdOWwCWAkgMH/y8CUpSKmc5LlqJWYI= Message-ID: <4F1BE7B4.6090702@infracaninophile.co.uk> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:40:52 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Linimon References: <4F177264.3090708@freebsd.org> <4F17DB1C.6080503@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4F193FD5.8070208@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20120121204614.GH4729@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <20120121204614.GH4729@lonesome.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.4 OpenPGP: id=60AE908C Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigC76853508DF2E094B1C2127F" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.3 at lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Chris Rees Subject: Re: NOT_FOR_ARCHS considered harmful [was: with the cvs history? trying to help INDEX builds.] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:41:12 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigC76853508DF2E094B1C2127F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 21/01/2012 20:46, Mark Linimon wrote: > tl;dr: I want to switch the default assumption we're making. >=20 > IMHO when new ports come into the tree, we should make our default > assumption that we will try to build them on amd64 and i386. For cases= > that this does not hold, we consider this Bad and committer-must-fix. > For the tier-2s, we shift the default assumption to "only set it to > buildable once it has been shown to be so". So, the burden of proof > shifts the other way: to a user of a tier-2 to claim "I tried this and > it works", rather than portmgr saying "we tried this and it doesn't wor= k". Doesn't your proposed change in semantics of the 'FOR_ARCHS' stuff mean that over time, as other architectures become more popular, most ports will have to have an explicit 'ONLY_FOR_ARCHS' setting? If the default effectively becomes 'ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=3D i386 amd64' then as ports are show= n to work on different platforms they will need an ONLY_FOR_ARCHS line in their Makefiles listing where they are known to work? Or else the ports becomes effectively i386 / amd64 only? > (Of course, for things like p5-* it doesn't really matter; if perl > builds, to a first approximation they'll build as well. I'm talking > about the things like biology/, deskutils/, games/, math/, science, > x11*/, and so forth.) >=20 > What do people think? There are a lot of ports where the distinction between CPU architectures is pretty much irrelevant. I can't see portmaster(8) (for example) failing to work anywhere the base system works. I was thinking about this a while back. Test the contents of packages to see if they install any object code -- ports/129210 -- and mark the ones that don't as arch-independent in some way (CATEGORIES+=3D arch-inde= p perhaps?) Cheers, Matthew --=20 Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW --------------enigC76853508DF2E094B1C2127F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk8b574ACgkQ8Mjk52CukIxXmQCfYjwQIA677xnDR8WrPO76BnO7 dHQAn09XwVl5biS13KX9+Vs90Xyu6ttx =y+jm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigC76853508DF2E094B1C2127F--