From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 2 09:28:55 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 5AED8106566C for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:28:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E56838FC1A for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:28:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (pD9E2E4AF.dip.t-dialin.net [217.226.228.175]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88CDE2E0AD; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:28:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C7D0C3353; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:28:45 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=Leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1238664525; bh=p7fVH9g7dvhl1rzF8lDqfYcpLFibR2JP4 qNjFJ0ULPE=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ZB8hcwu27wvlxdJ+MW9DviVh20CUOnr/aRIiVegtnNpREM6c7TjHnUaaIQ6jpH1yX caEaU15twt19khFp7l51ntXq1FkCsFsG4NjSdiuVbENpXEwgdbKzP6yO/dOS/D+VmAi abymmUOVFcfdUl3ZAfsPlBla7BfzwYRHRpWsU/ahV4hGfsBLmFP64VL4u7aNoJmDxVh EEyhccKTDPqItJAnxpoyE+pmEPX5SR1FUhXMjMDRrADHpxwlba6unOjUbv2aoTZytz7 u/QwtgvnLbdvFWeO5ztTJLR4QeSLrvigvGppiO8HvjyxU6AeH7iOIY8WqrVU5ASAZn+ MFuJZg9Mw== Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.14.3/8.13.8/Submit) id n329Si0U083362; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:28:44 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 11:28:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20090402112844.37181kh3emgs16w0@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 11:28:44 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Boris Samorodov References: <23488525@bb.ipt.ru> <20090402085240.15665qo8nwvu1fwg@webmail.leidinger.net> <25236143@h30.sp.ipt.ru> <20090402101419.66294qotkt3yphpw@webmail.leidinger.net> <59154474@h30.sp.ipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <59154474@h30.sp.ipt.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.3) / FreeBSD-8.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner-ID: 88CDE2E0AD.8F951 X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, ORDB-RBL, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-13.504, required 6, BAYES_00 -15.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.00, DKIM_VERIFIED -0.00, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE 1.40, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.10) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No 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 09:28:55 -0000 Quoting Boris Samorodov (from Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:25:41 +0400)= : > On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 10:14:19 +0200 Alexander Leidinger wrote: >> Quoting Boris Samorodov (from Thu, 02 Apr 2009 =20 >> 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 >=3D non_base_ports. I'll agree. > But not equal. While this may be possible in some cases, I would prefer the "=3D" =20 instead of the ">=3D". What's the fallback in case the NON_BASE is not set? I would expect: _BASE_PORT and _NON_BASE_PORT not set: -> default _BASE_PORT set and _NON_BASE_PORT not set: _NON_BASE_PORT =3D _BASE_PORT > 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. Ok, for testing I see some value in it, but I would prefer if we make =20 it explicit everywhere where it is mentioned, that this is not =20 something which is supposed to work. If it does not work, the user =20 should use the same type of base and non-base ports. Would this be OK =20 for you? Bye, Alexander. --=20 If you change lines, the one you just left will start to move faster than the one you are now in. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137