Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 19:53:56 +0100 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> To: "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program Message-ID: <CADLo83-UWuVALEacEoECzoi63PmWbt%2BBUjk0XhU2-wnO6pXT_A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20121027185228.9CC5B58094@chaos.jnpr.net> References: <201210020750.23358.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAGH67wTM1VDrpu7rS=VE1G_kVEOHhS4-OCy5FX_6eDGmiNTA8A@mail.gmail.com> <201210021037.27762.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAGH67wQffjVHqFw_eN=mfeg-Ac2Z6XBT5Hv72ev0kjjx7YH7SA@mail.gmail.com> <127FA63D-8EEE-4616-AE1E-C39469DDCC6A@xcllnt.net> <20121025211522.GA32636@dragon.NUXI.org> <3F52B7C9-A7B7-4E0E-87D0-1E67FE5D0BA7@xcllnt.net> <CAGH67wRw_n2_KwVz=DZkMpeJ4t8mMf965nxehHsDV-mzTnn5cA@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo839EUTF9bP8VD3L1_boY8i-w8B87yHGRR7Zx6wONFnSnEQ@mail.gmail.com> <20121025221244.GG3808@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20121026181152.GC44331@dragon.NUXI.org> <CADLo838vSnYm3LMr_6maQipAYtBTX%2BCCyEhC053cj_amgNJH=g@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo83-d0tDN8k5Lv9c5=6vQawVHSHZENfTpKzxe61OYqqxSeA@mail.gmail.com> <20121026204910.E1FFA58094@chaos.jnpr.net> <CADLo8383Y823kqKgBLHfx9CdCDuZQgVQSYwfuWq_29Hq7cYv=Q@mail.gmail.com> <20121026233225.54FB858094@chaos.jnpr.net> <CADLo839LZOdMp%2B%2B3PnbN91%2B5Lfzvm=_GNRRfVdVATYcXm9BVJg@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo838geLFZT4EH8sPuichUn8cw7D8pBQOgiQbEu2BCuTDwiw@mail.gmail.com> <20121027185228.9CC5B58094@chaos.jnpr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 27 October 2012 19:52, Simon J. Gerraty <sjg@juniper.net> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 14:23:29 +0100, Chris Rees writes:
>>We (ab)use the security update mechanism to merge the pmake changes
>>(:tl and :tu) into releng/7.4 and releng/8.3 (possibly the earlier
>
> I originally provided the :tl and :tu patch for something like that
> (not planning any abuse mind ;-)
>
> But, if portmgr test my "patch" and find it works "ok" (for some value of
> "ok") for older releases, this probably isn't necessary?
>
> It may still be useful though to provide an updated fmake via ports,
> which could make it easier for folk to migrate other code bases.
> The sed script to be applied to makefiles is trivial btw:
>
> $ cat f2bmake.sed
> /$.*:[UL][:)}]/ { s,:L,:tl,g;s,:U,:tu,g; }
> $
I know the fix is trivial :)
I'm saying that it's unacceptable to expect people to change their
systems just to make the ports tree work after we have broken it on a
supposedly supported version.
Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo83-UWuVALEacEoECzoi63PmWbt%2BBUjk0XhU2-wnO6pXT_A>