Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:45:26 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> Cc: g@sh4-5.1blu.de, Matthias Apitz <guru@unixarea.de>, Niclas Zeising <zeising@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, cy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports && 10-CURRENT Message-ID: <20130619224526.GA23721@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <201306191926.r5JJQe8A079087@slippy.cwsent.com> References: <guru@unixarea.de> <20130619141527.GA25228@sh4-5.1blu.de> <201306191926.r5JJQe8A079087@slippy.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:26:40PM -0700, Cy Schubert wrote: > In message <20130619141527.GA25228@sh4-5.1blu.de>, Matthias Apitz writes: > > El d=EDa Wednesday, June 19, 2013 a las 06:32:40AM -0700, Cy Schubert e= scribi=F3: > >=20 > > > You don't understand. devel/imake is a fine piece of software but peo= ple do > > =20 > > > not want to install more software than they have to. net/vnc comes wi= th=20 > > > it's own integrated Xserver. Using this logic we should integrate=20 > > > x11-servers/xorg into it too. Neither makes sense. The only reason to= use=20 > > > devel/imake is if net/vnc _installs_ its own imake, which it does not= =2E=20 > > > There's no reason to install more software just to build other softwa= re if=20 > > > we don't need it. It's extra baggage. > >=20 > > I keep thinking, that _if_ there is already installed an imake, net/vnc > > should make use of it and not try to build its own one; and most of the > > users of net/vnc will have installed an X server before; >=20 > Agreed. >=20 > I doubt devel/imake would be any more successful though. I haven't looked= =20 > at it closely (less than a couple of minutes, so I may be wrong) but I=20 > believe that OSMajorVersion may not be defined properly under 10. >=20 Problem with imake is that it doesn't work with clang because it uses a traditional cpp while clang's cpp does not support traditional mode, the po= rt right now has been "fixed" by making it use gcpp, which is not something we= want in long term as gcpp will be removed from base one day. I'm working on devel/tradcpp and to make devel/imake use this version to fi= x the situation, if some ports do bundle imake they will not benefit those fixes = so it will duplicate the work. There is a reason while we do prefer undbundling things the main one is tha= t the bug fix and the compatibility patch, having to do them only once is less painful. regards, Bapt --UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlHCNIYACgkQ8kTtMUmk6EyOswCeM1o9bw4+AuwzL7UNoZCmLWDj yhUAmwfFt1bhcqz105QoxbRBYrKnm78+ =Tr4q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130619224526.GA23721>