Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:58:07 +0200 (EET) From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG> To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG (Maxim Sobolev), cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/editors/AbiWord Makefile Message-ID: <200110301059.f9UAxRZ44541@vega.vega.com> In-Reply-To: <20011030021847.D31498@dragon.nuxi.com> from "David O'Brien" at Oct 30, 2001 02:18:47 AM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 11:54:11AM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> > > obrien 2001/10/30 00:52:07 PST
> > >
> > > Modified files:
> > > editors/AbiWord Makefile
> > > Log:
> > > Don't USE_AUTOCONF=yes -- this port doesn't let bsd.port.mk run autoconf
> > > as is intended. I don't know what the porter was trying to acompilsh.
> > > Also, I accidently removed some lines I didn't intend to.
> >
> > Huh, have you tried to contact maintainer about that first?
>
> UH.. don't need to -- I have email straigh from Satoshi asking me to do
> something about this.
About what? You broke previous documented assumption that
${AUTOMAKE} is a path to a sript and that caused lot of breakage.
But instead of fixing the real source of problem you started
"fixing" in the wrong place.
> > You broke bsd.port.mk by introducing a false assumption that the
> > automake port should be called ${PORTSDIR}/devel/${AUTOMAKE},
>
> no I didn't, ports doing something crazy with AUTOMAKE should either
> not be setting USE_AUTOMAKE. As it stands a port maintainer can
> update to newer automake (version 1.5) just by adding
> AUTOMAKE=automake.
Synopsis in the bsd.port.mk clearly indicates that ${AUTOMAKE} is
a *path* to automake script and I do not see why there should be
1:1 mapping between this path and name of the automake port. If
you are going to change semantincs of it please do it orderly, i.e.
discuss it on ports@, document it, give people a time to convert
to a new order and only then pull a switch.
> I asked for you and portmgr to help engineer a solution. I got
> little to no help. I am actually dishartened that a non-portmgr
> person had to take this one as the portmgr people didn't seem
> interested in well...maintaining the ports collection as a
> collection.
Huh, I am not sure about portmgr@ as a whole, but I was trying to
communicate to you my vision of the problem. Unfortunately my
arguments were ignored by you without any reasonable objections,
so after a sufficient number of tries I've just gave up feeling
that any further discussion is absolutly pointless.
-Maxim
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200110301059.f9UAxRZ44541>