From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 12 10:23:04 2005 Return-Path: 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 5FA0F16A4CE for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:23:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (pop.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 434CB43D49 for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:23:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from barner@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2005 10:23:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO zi025.glhnet.mhn.de) (129.187.19.157) by mail.gmx.net (mp017) with SMTP; 12 Mar 2005 11:23:02 +0100 X-Authenticated: #147403 Received: by zi025.glhnet.mhn.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A5DB4C216; Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:23:04 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:23:04 +0100 From: Simon Barner To: "Pedro F. Giffuni" Message-ID: <20050312102304.GC14469@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de> References: <20050311233859.22493.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="WplhKdTI2c8ulnbP" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050311233859.22493.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 cc: Simon Barner cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/78687: Warning cleanups for graphics/URT port X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:23:04 -0000 --WplhKdTI2c8ulnbP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: > > IMHO these kinds of patches do not belong into the ports collection in > > the first place. While they are correct, and reduce the number of > > compiler warnings and improve the general quality of the code, they are > > not necessary to make the software run on FreeBSD. > >=20 >=20 > Actually if someone wants to build the BRLCAD fb support some of them wil= l be > necessary. Okay, although you said that in the PR, I somehow did not noticed that. > The idea is, also, that if gcc (or ICC or TenDRA) is stricter in the > future it will not break URT (it has happened before), or at least that i= t will > not make be a nightmare to fix it again. >=20 > > Is there any chance to have those changes integrated upstream, i.e. by > > the authors of URT? > > >=20 > No, URT is not actively maintained anymore. It is part of BRLCAD, but I'v= e been > trying to convince them to un-bundle it so we that we can use our port. I= hope > they also unbundle Tcl, Tk, itcl, iTk, and iwidgets it's very bulky packa= ge > (the last three need updating in our ports tree too). Okay, then it's a totaly different situation -- if URT is not actively maintained anymore, why not integrate fixes that are floating around in mailing lists (like that IRIX patch you mentioned in the PR) into the ports collection? > =20 > > If that's not the case (because the software is abandoned), or the do > > not plan a new release within a reasonable timeframe, I'd prefer to have > > those patches bundled in one file, say patch-FIX-WARNINGS, so that our > > repository is not clobbered with a dozend of small, non-FreeBSD specific > > patches. > >=20 > Something like this happened with Spice and XView.. it was a mess to brea= k up > the patches afterwards to make sure we were not patching a file twice or = in > conflicting ways. I did the cleaning of those ports because I had some > responsability in that happening, but I won't do the same mistake again f= or > URT. I personally also dislike the approach of having a patch that touches multiple files (patch-aa, patch-ab, ...), but I though it would conform better to the port collection's standards this time. But if noone has objections, and you have experience in these things, I will of course honour your efforts and commit the patches as single files! >=20 > > So, to sum this up: I really appreciate your work very much, but IMO the > > ports collection is not the best place to store your patches. > >=20 >=20 > Admitedly I didn't explain this very well: The patch contains cleanups an= d some > minor fixes, but it also paves the way for building-in new functionality = so > that I can avoid re-building URT with BRLCAD. Which is great! Let's see whether they unbundle tcl/tk from the package, such that it can be installed in a much more sane way. >=20 > > Perhaps someone else from the ports@ list can share her/his opinion with > > us? > >=20 >=20 > I'm surely glad to receive feedback, and if someone else wants to maintai= n URT > I'll be glad to let him/her know my requirements. Cheers, Simon --WplhKdTI2c8ulnbP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCMsMICkn+/eutqCoRAnuEAKDtw+7MkSjgmCi9+uoNlm1yrUDXsQCg/MqU bukb3IY3nXVl3pQKT965T/Q= =KumD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --WplhKdTI2c8ulnbP--