From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 18 09:41:16 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAD4D16A41F for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:41:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from www.ebusiness-leidinger.de (jojo.ms-net.de [84.16.236.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15ADA43D55 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:41:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (p54A5DD5C.dip.t-dialin.net [84.165.221.92]) (authenticated bits=0) by www.ebusiness-leidinger.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j7I9YGTc094779; Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:34:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j7I9dngO075459; Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:39:49 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from 141.113.101.31 ([141.113.101.31]) by netchild.homeip.net (Horde MIME library) with HTTP for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:39:49 +0200 Message-ID: <20050818113949.kciryykkso00ko8k@netchild.homeip.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:39:49 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Brooks Davis References: <20050817195839.GA22027@odin.ac.hmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <20050817195839.GA22027@odin.ac.hmc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.0.3) / FreeBSD-4.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: prebuild sanity checks 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: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:41:16 -0000 Brooks Davis wrote: > This started me wondering if we shouldn't have a few sanity checks in > the build process so we refuse to build if the environment is missing > some really critical things. Obviously, we can't test everything since > it would take too long even if we had appropriate tests, but a few > checks might save some hair pulling. For this particular case, I can > think of two major ways to do it. First, we could just require that > /dev/null exist to do anything. That's probably a bit intrusive though. I don't think so. A lot of software depends upon it, e.g. configure scripts and even parts of our ports collection. Some parts may not produce unexpeted results if it isn't available, even when it it used, but not having /dev/null is a hack in this case and we shouldn't approve this misuse of the software. So I think this isn't intrusive at all. > Another option might be a new variable (or variables) that ports that > tend to break spectacularly and unobviously can set like: > > BUILD_DEVS= null zero > > Does this seem like a reasonable thing to do? If you realy only talk about /dev/*: I object to make it a part of individual makefiles. Either we depend on the common devs globally, or not at all. Everything else is a maintainance nightmare (99% of the maintainers do/will not test in such a restricted environment). Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 non-redundant fan failure