From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 28 18:45:52 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0322D37B401
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:45:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.lovett.com (sentinel.ranger.supernews.net [216.168.1.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AA7643FCB
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:45:49 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from ade@lovett.com)
Received: from cs666853-113.austin.rr.com
	([66.68.53.113] helo=[10.0.0.2] ident=guns)
	by mail.lovett.com with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
	id 18z6Lt-000Jhb-00; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 02:45:49 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 20:45:47 -0600
From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, <ports@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <BAAA64FB.30D6E%ade@lovett.com>
In-Reply-To: <20030328222716.GC23305@rot13.obsecurity.org>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: BROKEN ports scheduled for removal
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 02:45:53 -0000

On 03/28/03 16:27, "Kris Kennaway" <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote:
> It builds fine on stock 4.x, but fails on 5.0.  I'll mark it BROKEN on
> 5.0.  I can't think of an easy way to indicate that it does not
> compile with newer perl versions.  We probably need a BUILD_CONFLICTS
> directive similar to the runtime (package) conflicts patches I am
> testing.

Erm.

  .include <bsd.port.pre.mk>

  .if ${PERL_LEVEL} >= 500601
  BROKEN= "Does not work with perl >= 5.6.x"
  .endif

  .include <bsd.port.post.mk>

PERL_LEVEL is in widespread use elsewhere for ports that are part of the
5.6.x and 5.8.x perl ports (like devel/p5-File-Spec, to take a random
example).

Apart from the fact that it's not amazingly pretty, what am I missing?

-aDe