Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 06:45:37 +0100 From: Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/91911: [PATCH]: x11-toolkits/linux-gtk2: distfile unfetchable Message-ID: <20060214064537.5eee9612.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060213093951.ydtb988ykgkwgcg0@netchild.homeip.net> References: <200602081940.k18Je7uC012039@freefall.freebsd.org> <20060209202602.1449abba.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> <20060210101931.k017bqbpus8gosws@netchild.homeip.net> <43EC86B4.6060600@vonostingroup.com> <20060211135019.335f3ed2@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <43EDEF75.10707@vonostingroup.com> <20060211220725.57f7c7cf@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20060211224005.6e3bf0e9.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> <20060211235438.1fd74966@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20060212200725.6a80e32d.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> <20060212213446.5220d374@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20060212221248.36710973.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> <20060213093951.ydtb988ykgkwgcg0@netchild.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 09:39:51 +0100 Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> wrote: > Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > >> Feel free to come up with other broken ports. > > > > They are not broken. I'm making the point that you should either > > They are broken regarding the current (non-ideal) state of affairs. > > > commit the SUB_ARCH (or whatever varname will make you sleep better) > > I like to see LINUX_RPM_ARCH instead of SUB_ARCH. > > > patch, let me do it, or have portmgr commit the bpm patch. > > Since the change to linux-gtk/Makefile affects a lot of ports, I object to a > commit without appropriate testing. Feel free to team up with portmgr for a > test run on the ports build cluster (amd64 and ideally ia32 too) for this > change. If portmgr doesn't see obvious problems in the test run with a > change from ARCH to LINUX_RPM_ARCH, I welcome the commit of this patch. > > > FYI, the following ports (which I maintain) are affected: > > > > emulators/linux-ePSXe > > emulators/linux-peops-* > > emulators/linux-pete-* > > games/linux-x-plane > > games/linux-x-plane-net-installer > > x11-themes/linux-gtk-bluecurve-theme > > The only thing you just said is, that your ports don't comply to the current > scheme and you know about it. > > All of those ports are some kind of leaf ports, while most of the ports which > do the ARCH-dance ATM are infrastructure ports which are used by several leaf > ports. The impact due to a bad change to the infrastructure ports is higher, > than the impact of changes to your leaf ports. If portmgr doesn't has the > time to do the test run on the cluster, I suggest you change your ports to > comply to the current scheme. We can fix it properly (the quick fix is to > commit this patch; a better solution would be to use bsd.linux-rpm.mk, > especially since a new linux_base port without the use of the rpm command is > upcomming) after the release then. Personally I don't think that all this care is necessary; we're fixing a bug. If you want a test run you can take the already submitted patches and rename SUB_ARCH to LINUX_RPM_ARCH. -- Jean-Yves Lefort jylefort@FreeBSD.org http://lefort.be.eu.org/ [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFD8W6ByzD7UaO4AGoRAiN7AJ4sKcIsxC+40RZLaPrSH6MK2cJIYwCfQqUO zpsseQsFDlV5TuCuN126xaM= =jzNP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060214064537.5eee9612.jylefort>