Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 14:49:23 -0700 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: Chris Rees <crees@physics.org> Cc: Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.org>, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r373100 - in head: . Mk databases/glom databases/libzdb databases/opendbx databases/pglesslog databases/qt4-pgsql-plugin databases/qt5-sqldrivers-pgsql databases/rubygem-do_postgres dat... Message-ID: <913FC640-B7AB-4020-A0A0-3B2DA4225DD9@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <547103CD.2020309@physics.org> References: <201411222040.sAMKe9tk086292@svn.freebsd.org> <48EBC1CA-CB07-47E0-88A3-94B1ED7B31A0@adamw.org> <547103CD.2020309@physics.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 22 Nov, 2014, at 14:44, Chris Rees <crees@physics.org> wrote: >=20 > On 22/11/2014 21:31, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> On 22 Nov, 2014, at 13:40, Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >>> Author: crees >>> Date: Sat Nov 22 20:40:08 2014 >>> New Revision: 373100 >>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/373100 >>> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r373100/ >>>=20 >>> Log: >>> Finally retire USE_PGSQL >>>=20 >>> + USE_PGSQL=3Dserver becomes USES=3Dpgsql and WANT_PGSQL=3Dserver >> USES=3Dperl5 has USE_PERL5, USES=3Dpython has USE_PYTHON, USES=3Dopenal= has USE_OPENAL, USES=3Dfam has USE_FAM. >>=20 >> Why is pgsql WANT_ instead of USE_? >=20 > Hm. A couple of reasons really; USE_PGSQL was used before by = bsd.database.mk, and with the two coexisting perhaps sharing the = variable was not desired; I remember back in December last year when = writing this that people weren't keen on separate variables at all, = preferring to use arguments to USES. During that discussion, no-one = mentioned that WANT_PGSQL wasn't desirable (perhaps it wasn't even = discussed). >=20 > I could rename it to USE_PGSQL now the code is removed from = bsd.database.mk I suppose... but is it necessary? I don't personally = think it's a great idea to reuse variables that used to mean something = else... Definitely makes sense not to use USE_PGSQL while the transition is = underway. But now that the transition is complete, USE_PGSQL is a NOOP = unless USES=3Dpgsql is there, no? So if somebody tried to do = USE_PGSQL=3Dyes it wouldn't work, same as it won't work now. My suggestion would always be to aim for consistency across the = different USES modules, but I can't even begin to guess how much work it = took to get the USES=3Dpgsql transition done! # Adam --=20 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?913FC640-B7AB-4020-A0A0-3B2DA4225DD9>