From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 2 08:25:43 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D5D3106564A for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 08:25:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsam@ipt.ru) Received: from mail.ipt.ru (mail.ipt.ru [194.62.233.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35F308FC0C for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 08:25:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsam@ipt.ru) Received: from gate.ipt.ru ([194.62.233.123] helo=h30.sp.ipt.ru) by mail.ipt.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.62 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1LpIF4-0001Ji-6W; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:25:42 +0400 Received: from bsam by h30.sp.ipt.ru with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1LpIF3-0003ez-UI; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:25:41 +0400 To: Alexander Leidinger References: <23488525@bb.ipt.ru> <20090402085240.15665qo8nwvu1fwg@webmail.leidinger.net> <25236143@h30.sp.ipt.ru> <20090402101419.66294qotkt3yphpw@webmail.leidinger.net> From: Boris Samorodov Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:25:41 +0400 In-Reply-To: <20090402101419.66294qotkt3yphpw@webmail.leidinger.net> (Alexander Leidinger's message of "Thu\, 02 Apr 2009 10\:14\:19 +0200") Message-ID: <59154474@h30.sp.ipt.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: new linux infrastructure ports are committed X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 08:25:43 -0000 On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 10:14:19 +0200 Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Quoting Boris Samorodov (from Thu, 02 Apr 2009 11:57:52 +0400): > > On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 08:52:40 +0200 Alexander Leidinger wrote: > >> Quoting Boris Samorodov (from Wed, 01 Apr 2009 > >> 19:34:42 +0400): > > > >> > The above mentioned infrasrtucture allows using different linux > >> > base ports and non-base infrastructure ports. Users should define > >> > at their /etc/make.conf two variables: OVERRIDE_LINUX_BASE_PORT > >> > and OVERRIDE_LINUX_NON_BASE_PORTS. The valid value for the latter > >> > is "f8". > > > >> Why do we distinguish between BASE_PORT and NON_BASE_PORTS? > > > > We distingush them now and I'd rather keep this useful feature. > I fail to understand in which case this is useful? AFAIK we can not > use a base of fc4 with non-base of f8 and for the other way around I > assume the same (if not: I don't see a point in using fc4 infra on f8 > base, where do you see a benefit for it?). That sounds to me like base_port >= non_base_ports. I'll agree. But not equal. Hm, I've used base of f6 and non-base of fc4 for a long period of time. Now I'm going to commit base of f9 (f10) and use it with non-base of 8. Utill apropriate non-base ports get committed. In fact, all those who now use other base ports than fc4 are falling into the list of users of this feature. WBR -- Boris Samorodov (bsam) Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet SP FreeBSD committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve