From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 14 05:45:40 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B21416A422 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2006 05:45:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jylefort@FreeBSD.org) Received: from host-212-68-242-42.brutele.be (host-212-68-242-42.brutele.be [212.68.242.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE1F43D55 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2006 05:45:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jylefort@FreeBSD.org) Received: from jsite.lefort.net (jsite.lefort.net [192.168.1.2]) by gateway.lefort.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E36D549A; Tue, 14 Feb 2006 06:45:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from jsite.lefort.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jsite.lefort.net (Postfix) with SMTP id BA426C108; Tue, 14 Feb 2006 06:45:37 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 06:45:37 +0100 From: Jean-Yves Lefort To: Alexander Leidinger 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> X-Mailer: Sylpheed running on FreeBSD Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="PGP-SHA1"; boundary="Signature=_Tue__14_Feb_2006_06_45_37_+0100_bs2Csfuu_XHw2Mdr" Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/91911: [PATCH]: x11-toolkits/linux-gtk2: distfile unfetchable X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 05:45:40 -0000 --Signature=_Tue__14_Feb_2006_06_45_37_+0100_bs2Csfuu_XHw2Mdr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 09:39:51 +0100 Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Jean-Yves Lefort wrote: >=20 > >> Feel free to come up with other broken ports. > > > > They are not broken. I'm making the point that you should either >=20 > They are broken regarding the current (non-ideal) state of affairs. >=20 > > commit the SUB_ARCH (or whatever varname will make you sleep better) >=20 > I like to see LINUX_RPM_ARCH instead of SUB_ARCH. >=20 > > patch, let me do it, or have portmgr commit the bpm patch. >=20 > Since the change to linux-gtk/Makefile affects a lot of ports, I object t= o 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. >=20 > > 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 >=20 > The only thing you just said is, that your ports don't comply to the curr= ent > scheme and you know about it. >=20 > All of those ports are some kind of leaf ports, while most of the ports w= hich > 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 high= er, > 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. --=20 Jean-Yves Lefort jylefort@FreeBSD.org http://lefort.be.eu.org/ --Signature=_Tue__14_Feb_2006_06_45_37_+0100_bs2Csfuu_XHw2Mdr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFD8W6ByzD7UaO4AGoRAiN7AJ4sKcIsxC+40RZLaPrSH6MK2cJIYwCfQqUO zpsseQsFDlV5TuCuN126xaM= =jzNP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Tue__14_Feb_2006_06_45_37_+0100_bs2Csfuu_XHw2Mdr--