From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 19 22:45:31 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A7B43C1; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:45:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from baptiste.daroussin@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wg0-x230.google.com (mail-wg0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A0E1388; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:45:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id f11so4983794wgh.15 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:45:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=M1VJ4u1Qk/DWoc19TI6X/hGB0onoEfCS9rIJsNvjfDc=; b=UYoSh2h5Tz5Ha4g6CVcj3Cxxb8Y/jRnliPwZtC3blUdOc7SbmdtnrBUQzgdDIrvd2R EHEPUtz9UXvUwHHX/Ei/1L9vYgV2JVaquBiFHz0xhD/cbO9MvTtGPrpXjp+hfqpyp3Kv PmUrUQdh9jk6/P8J8xsPc9U3yC67gC0cUIUQKfnL8kYyLL6ENpRJOQhIs/xBLJQFa58Z HKtDSLjg/3uHezmYxaZDf4eHUlRQrbQnOYNe1suvHuD8fWVk0zLQiGRNAteJUvdiimOg FIhGeiYmmZ2C4kQXIszt8uVV6N/NLqgzV1AOb+pNBExNHaq0CsKnk1r6z1YcGVXNkXpS PhZw== X-Received: by 10.194.90.244 with SMTP id bz20mr3868124wjb.69.1371681930080; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:45:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ithaqua.etoilebsd.net (ithaqua.etoilebsd.net. [37.59.37.188]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fu14sm12534430wic.0.2013.06.19.15.45.28 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:45:29 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Baptiste Daroussin Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:45:26 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Cy Schubert Subject: Re: ports && 10-CURRENT Message-ID: <20130619224526.GA23721@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <20130619141527.GA25228@sh4-5.1blu.de> <201306191926.r5JJQe8A079087@slippy.cwsent.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201306191926.r5JJQe8A079087@slippy.cwsent.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: g@sh4-5.1blu.de, Matthias Apitz , Niclas Zeising , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, cy@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:45:31 -0000 --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--