Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 16:27:15 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> Cc: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> Subject: Re: BROKEN vs. IGNORE [was: cvs commit: ports/devel/whups Makefile] Message-ID: <20040321002715.GC40898@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <1079717578.780.7.camel@gyros> References: <200402180350.i1I3oZtv045855@repoman.freebsd.org> <405AC85C.1070001@fillmore-labs.com> <1079717578.780.7.camel@gyros>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 12:32:58PM -0500, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 05:15, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > > Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > > > kris 2004/02/17 19:50:35 PST > > > > > > FreeBSD ports repository > > > > > > Modified files: > > > devel/whups Makefile > > > Log: > > > Change BROKEN to IGNORE since the package still builds (but does not work) > > > > Are there any rules when to use BROKEN and when to use IGNORE? > > > > <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2004-March/010340.html>; > > Basically, ports marked BROKEN will attempted to be built by bento where > as ports marked IGNORE will not be. If it's a transient build issue, > mark it as BROKEN so that the errors will still show up on bento, and > given people something to look at when fixing. However, if the port > will _never_ build in a given environment, or builds but fails to run, > then mark IGNORE. ...or if it does something sufficiently bad while building, like sitting in an infinite loop emitting text (which generates those 256MB logfiles you sometimes see). Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAXOFiWry0BWjoQKURAu6iAJ43MpEnIIhSosYHF1hzE6pGF+oTgQCfXJYT 8amdqldHeGvcs+PLH3s7xGU= =Zy/w -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040321002715.GC40898>