Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 2 Jul 2013 16:50:01 GMT
From:      Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap@NLnetLabs.nl>
To:        freebsd-python@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: ports/179812: Extract the python part from dns/ldns into dns/py-ldns
Message-ID:  <201307021650.r62Go1AH063035@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR ports/179812; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap@NLnetLabs.nl>
To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@mat.cc>
Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/179812: Extract the python part from dns/ldns into dns/py-ldns
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2013 18:47:05 +0200

   > +--On 2 juillet 2013 14:12:49 +0200 Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap@NLnetLabs.nl>
   > wrote:
   > | Hi,
   > |     
   > |    >What about enclosing the post-configure, post-build and post-install
   > | inside    >a .if !defined(BUILD_PYLDNS) ?
   > |    >There's no point of adding them if they're empty anyway.
   > | 
   > | I personally dislike nested .if statements and try to avoid them
   > | but yes, it likely works just as well.
   > 
   > Well, I've thought about it for a while when I was cooking the patch, it's
   > either :
   > - what I did with nested .if's
   > - extract what's not needed by the python part in another file and include
   > it (ugly)
   > - copying stuffs to dns/py-ldns so that they're no longer master/slave but
   > it'd be twice the load for each upgrade.
 
 Yes, it is a devilish dilemma. When I said "dislike" it doesn't
 mean I'm dead against it. I can go either way, either the big .if
 or the repeated !defined(BUILD_PYLDNS). You pick.
 
 	jaap



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201307021650.r62Go1AH063035>