From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Thu Jun 15 03:39:29 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD13FBFF5AD; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 03:39:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C2F21272; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 03:39:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id DA0C5194D8; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 03:39:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 03:39:28 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Adam Weinberger Cc: "Tobias C. Berner" , ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r443599 - head/Mk Message-ID: <20170615033928.GA66016@FreeBSD.org> References: <201706142018.v5EKIc8G062340@repo.freebsd.org> <20170615005515.GA26393@FreeBSD.org> <2E7EBFF9-6184-4CCA-BCAF-A3991EAF3A94@adamw.org> <20170615015635.GA78699@FreeBSD.org> <42DEC213-DF22-4BDF-9EA2-876629BA763C@adamw.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42DEC213-DF22-4BDF-9EA2-876629BA763C@adamw.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.2 (2017-04-18) X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 03:39:29 -0000 On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 08:54:33PM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > On 14 Jun, 2017, at 19:56, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > ... > > [I] was somewhat disappointed that my PR was closed as WONTFIX (works > > as intended) with no response to analysis of the problem, no discussion > > of the proposed solution, etc. > > > > All the effort was flushed down the toilet. > > > > Needless to say, the problem is still there until someone else trips on > > it and opens a similar PR. > > Consider opening a new PR (199297 turned into a different issue) and > attaching a patch. I might do so, but I'd like to hear from Tobias first regarding the way he had handled this one. Right now I'm a bit hesitant to spend time on crafting a patch and filing another PR just to find out it is closed as WONTFIX later again. > And there probably is merit to finding out what other stuff breaks > when WRKDIRPREFIX != realpath WRKDIRPREFIX. Yeah, I mention this; there seems to be low interest though. ./danfe