Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 22:14:31 -0700 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>, Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r392209 - in head/devel: . p5-Minilla Message-ID: <02A72E36-1D93-42EF-85FA-D3AA8B0D667E@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <20150716153045.GB21677@FreeBSD.org> References: <201507152017.t6FKHElA056017@svnmir.geo.freebsd.org> <F55E1B42FC419AF2D5795884@atuin.in.mat.cc> <20150716014306.GA68880@FreeBSD.org> <20150716091021.GW37597@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20150716092053.GX37597@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20150716145201.GA13745@FreeBSD.org> <20150716145920.GY37597@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20150716151730.GA21677@FreeBSD.org> <20150716152043.GZ37597@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20150716153045.GB21677@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 16 Jul, 2015, at 8:30, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>=20
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 05:20:44PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 03:17:30PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>>> Fair enough; [...] lets make it easier for new folks to get a hold =
of
>>> things, no problem.
>>>=20
>>> But forbidding a 100% perfectly valid, supported, and documented =
syntax
>>> used in good will and intention by an experienced developer is IMO =
wrong.
>>=20
>> Given the number of times I had fixed side effect of this I bet I'm =
would
>> like to know how many people really knows how make(1) works :) in =
particular
>> in that area.
>=20
> When sat@ was actively doing his peer reviews, he would've always =
point it
> out to folks that misused lazy vs. immediate expansion. Too bad he's =
no
> longer active; I think that rather than trying to avoid sharp corners =
of our
> make(1), or any tool FWIW, we should be doing continuous education =
work akin
> to what he did...
>=20
>> With the new way of validating dependencies (where the pattern is now =
also
>> checked after the dependency is installed, people would now quickly =
noticed
>> but before this recent change it was most of the time silent. =
poudriere was
>> the only tool able to notice that).
>=20
> This actually brings us to another rule which makes more sense to =
become a
> "hard" one: DO NOT commit ports work without poudriere/tinderbox test =
run.
I=E2=80=99d just like to mention PR 191273, which suggesting adding a =
new depends macro
that registers a BUILD_ and RUN_DEPENDS.
BUILDANDRUN_DEPENDS=3D foo:...
(Or something. I=E2=80=99m terrible at naming things, but the =
concept/patch is there.)
By way of examples, a huge percentage of Perl modules rely on :=3D, and =
many of
them perform impressive manoeuvres to assign
RUN_DEPENDS:=3D ${BUILD_DEPENDS}
BUILD_DEPENDS+=3D =E2=80=A6
or my favorite
BUILD_DEPENDS=3D foo:...
RUN_DEPENDS:=3D ${BUILD_DEPENDS:Nfoo*}
The fact that not even the PHB was clear on whether :=3D was correct =
suggests that
there is a problem that can use a solution.
# Adam
=E2=80=94
Adam Weinberger
adamw@adamw.org
http://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?02A72E36-1D93-42EF-85FA-D3AA8B0D667E>