From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 9 10:47:51 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFB1D106567D; Tue, 9 Aug 2011 10:47:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cvs-src@yandex.ru) Received: from forward11.mail.yandex.net (forward11.mail.yandex.net [95.108.130.93]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 653528FC16; Tue, 9 Aug 2011 10:47:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp11.mail.yandex.net (smtp11.mail.yandex.net [95.108.130.67]) by forward11.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 57762E827E9; Tue, 9 Aug 2011 14:47:49 +0400 (MSD) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1312886869; bh=vOJrIfc8XYc0Vv1+dNvXl+IkvDA5vN1pLf0jTb8bGno=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=MfZXMjm1sYXI+OigHqjcUg6LAap/v7cPktN6C0ECxKWcS7BzbAk3U40IHXC7yW3h/ q3y+Fgfc8AX1ZXD0JrmrzcKvgamH3xQ9IN1JF2Z1X7KZwni3OXXT4VXj0vh9RoBn3k bnhS/ta0HwdmHV2pV7UElBn8yjEx76WojODtb1DI= Received: from smtp11.mail.yandex.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp11.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 32B197E033F; Tue, 9 Aug 2011 14:47:49 +0400 (MSD) Received: from unknown (unknown [213.27.65.65]) by smtp11.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTP id lmFqpv5A; Tue, 9 Aug 2011 14:47:49 +0400 X-Yandex-Spam: 1 Message-ID: <4E41104C.1040608@yandex.ru> Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 14:47:40 +0400 From: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD i386; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110701 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Koop Mast References: <4E403492.5090806@yandex.ru> <4E40D636.2000201@freebsd.org> <4E40FE8D.8080403@yandex.ru> <1312883597.58429.2.camel@crashalot.rainbow-runner.nl> <4E41085A.1080803@yandex.ru> <1312885638.58429.8.camel@crashalot.rainbow-runner.nl> In-Reply-To: <1312885638.58429.8.camel@crashalot.rainbow-runner.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD GNOME Users , Joe Marcus Clarke Subject: Re: What `gnometarget` is bsd.gnome.mk? X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:47:51 -0000 Koop Mast wrote on 09.08.2011 14:27: > On Tue, 2011-08-09 at 14:13 +0400, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote: >> Koop Mast wrote on 09.08.2011 13:53: >>> On Tue, 2011-08-09 at 13:31 +0400, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote: >>>> Joe Marcus Clarke wrote on 09.08.2011 10:39: >>>>> On 8/8/11 3:10 PM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> This component is defined in _USE_GNOME_ALL and i see it in USE_GNOME in >>>>>> some ports. But it doesn't seemed used. What it's for? >>>>>> >>>>>> PS. I wasn't able to find anything in Porters Handbook and GNOME porting >>>>>> guide. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Looks like this can be removed now. We used to have a special >>>>> CONFIGURE_TARGET for GNOME ports. If you look back through CVS history >>>>> you can see what this did. >>>>> >>>>> Joe >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> Here is the ports, that define USE_GNOME, and `gnometarget` is the only >>>> component, so USE_GNOME may be eliminated completely in this ports: >>>> >>>> http://pastebin.com/vpeX4r8K >>>> >>>> All the other ports that define `gnometarget` in USE_GNOME along with >>>> other components: >>>> >>>> http://pastebin.com/7j3FcEM7 >>>> >>>> Should i make pr, patches? >>>> >>> >>> I just reverted this commit since it broke 553 ports. I filed a pr >>> 159624 to track this issue. >>> >>> -Koop >> >> Ok. To be honest i didn't requested the deletion, just was curious what >> it is for :). >> > > Well you brought it to our attention, that is enough in my book :) > Anyway if you want to make a patch for this for all the ports, feel free > to attach it to the pr. If not, someone will deal with this. > > -Koop Sure i'll do this next two days. Just tell me some details about how this patch should look like. Should it be some monolithic diff against /usr/ports or it should be something to apply against single categories like /usr/ports/audio etc? The patch may lose it's actuality very fast in first case imho. -- Regards, Ruslan