From owner-cvs-all Tue May 28 8:15:57 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.92.13.169]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7439637B400; Tue, 28 May 2002 08:15:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.3/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g4SFFmJn058726; Tue, 28 May 2002 08:15:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g4SFFmFf058725; Tue, 28 May 2002 08:15:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:15:48 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" To: Marcel Moolenaar Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/emulators/linux_base Makefile distinfo.alpha distinfo.i386 pkg-plist.alpha pkg-plist.i386 Message-ID: <20020528081548.D33762@dragon.nuxi.com> Reply-To: obrien@FreeBSD.org Mail-Followup-To: David O'Brien , Marcel Moolenaar , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org References: <200205280235.g4S2ZPr85521@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020528040504.GB55559@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <20020528002336.A33431@dragon.nuxi.com> <20020528081154.GA86369@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20020528081154.GA86369@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>; from marcel@xcllnt.net on Tue, May 28, 2002 at 01:11:54AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 01:11:54AM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 12:23:36AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 09:05:04PM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > > Upgrade to Red Hat 7.x support. Many binary-only packages are now requiring > > > > Red Hat 7.x to run. > > > > > > We already have linux_base-7. > > > > Would you prefer no linux_base, but only linux_base-? > > That's basicly the direction a choose, but I didn't see a need to rename > linux_base to linux_base-6. My primary objective when I added linux_base-7 > was to not cause breakages, but instead have people upgrade their ports > and change the dependencies when applicable. RH 6 is sufficiently > incompatible with RH 7 that it's most of the time not as simple as a one > line change in the makefile. At least, that's what I expected... The problem is the linux_base* packages do not co-exist at all. And no one has had suffient motivation to fix things. Too much "status quo" here. See the rest of my comments to sobomax. > Whatever scheme we adopt, we should finally make up our minds and finish > the job. Shortly after I added linux_base-7, linux_base-6 was created > (not by me) and we still have 3 ports. It was created by me. I left linux_base-7 as-is for now incase we needed to make a quick fall back. Since you are bitching so much about it, it is gone now. There should be ONE and only ONE port -- linux_base. My Red Hat 7.2 system has the ability to run both RH 7 and RH 6 bits. We should be able to also -- just as I can run FBSD 2.2 and releng4 bits on my -current system. > So whatever the plan was, it's > still not executed. I added linux_devtools-7 in the mean time and if I'm > not mistaken will either end up having a different naming scheme then > linux_base or undergo the same changes, and thus will also leave a trail > of repocopies behind... I fail to see the problem here. We do repo copies all the time. The non-verioned number ports should be the latest versions. That is what users have come to expect. You seem to fail to realize I was trying to do this in steps that could easily be backed out. But to quiet the bitching, I'll update the linxu_devtools to the RH7 level now. Which really does nothing except to make a back out harder. > > I am only doing the work because no one else has been willing to move us > > forward in the past two years. > > Oh? It wasn't you who created support for the RH 7 runtime, so someone > else must have been willing. I think that you're doing the work because > the people who would have been willing are probably doing something else > now. Yep. > > If it is moving too slow for you, you are more than free to help out. > > Sorry. I dropped support for the linux_base ports when people started > pissin' in my pool by interfering instead of cooperating. I apparently > was unimportant enough to be ignored. Fine. Just don't expect I'll be > coming to their rescue now. This goes back to the MAINTAINER issue -- right now FreeBSD'ville seems to not want them -- but rather anachary. > If you want people to help, communicate and let people know what you're > up to. I think most (if not all) developers don't have a clue where this > is going to... Uh, to run all linux binaries easier than we do today. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message