Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2024 19:43:32 +0100 From: Daniel Engberg <daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net> To: Charlie Li <vishwin@freebsd.org> Cc: Gleb Popov <arrowd@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 25e6f68a6661 - main - textproc/libxml2: Update to 2.11.6 Message-ID: <30d803b8ab6713c88aa8fe2c0e516e51@mail.infomaniak.com> In-Reply-To: <d9314eaa-4629-49d4-8929-ba7b0551762a@freebsd.org> References: <202401121705.40CH5JhG014492@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <ZaIcEvYZ2Yq_jW9Z@FreeBSD.org> <CALH631=meexWeEvPY4dBsVviAEms9OfcmKTk-YHGfw4fHJCzSw@mail.gmail.com> <a228d839c5a29d9991b72f1e0664da04@mail.infomaniak.com> <02ebab1b-a763-45e4-9380-0d82c83c22a4@freebsd.org> <CALH631keLuwEchvHA8OWuHy_LiWsodJi8VL5NN-L5p1WYsKGwA@mail.gmail.com> <d9314eaa-4629-49d4-8929-ba7b0551762a@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On 2024-01-13T18:46:34.000+01:00, Charlie Li <vishwin@freebsd.org> wrote: > Gleb Popov wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 4:37 PM Charlie Li <vishwin@freebsd.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Until upstream specifically declares and recommends CMake as >>> ready for >>> >>> Unix-like systems in at least their documentation, nothing else >>> is relevant. >> >> What makes you so categorical about it? Recommendations are, >> well, >> >> recommendations. The upstream might even recommend nothing but >> Linux. >> >> Should we not port such software then? > > The Build Instructions section of the README specifically states > > "Autotools (for POSIX systems like Linux, BSD, macOS)", even in the > > latest trunk. CMake was originally added mainly for Windows support. > > > Their CMake support on platforms like ours still has an outstanding > bug > > pertaining to dependency resolution, which at least I consider a > > showstopper. While upstream have been accepting and responsive to > any > > and all improvements to their CMake support, that is irrelevant > until > > they explicitly bless it as an equal to autotools. (Not to say > autotools > > is perfect either, far from it) > > Personally, between the two choices here, I prefer CMake. But > personal > > preferences are irrelevant wrt liability and support issues. > > -- > > Charlie Li > > ...nope, still don't have an exit line. Hi, That's a bit contractionary? We upstream patches, community and others also do and yet there's a "support issue" despite autotools is "far from it" (perfect)? Why not embrace instead of obstructing? Please keep in mind ports is a joint / community effort which is why we have groups, guidelines etc and for custom trees there's overlay support for who want or need to diverge. Best regards, Daniel [-- Attachment #2 --] <div>On 2024-01-13T18:46:34.000+01:00, Charlie Li <vishwin@freebsd.org> wrote:<br></div><div class="ik_mail_quote answerContentMessage"><blockquote class="ws-ng-quote"><pre style="white-space: normal;"><div>Gleb Popov wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="ws-ng-quote"><div> On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 4:37 PM Charlie Li <<a class="defaultMailLink" href="mailto:vishwin@freebsd.org">vishwin@freebsd.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="ws-ng-quote"><div> <br></div><div> Until upstream specifically declares and recommends CMake as ready for<br></div><div> Unix-like systems in at least their documentation, nothing else is relevant.<br></div></blockquote><div> <br></div><div> What makes you so categorical about it? Recommendations are, well,<br></div><div> recommendations. The upstream might even recommend nothing but Linux.<br></div><div> Should we not port such software then?<br></div></blockquote><div> The Build Instructions section of the README specifically states <br></div><div>"Autotools (for POSIX systems like Linux, BSD, macOS)", even in the <br></div><div>latest trunk. CMake was originally added mainly for Windows support. <br></div><div>Their CMake support on platforms like ours still has an outstanding bug <br></div><div>pertaining to dependency resolution, which at least I consider a <br></div><div>showstopper. While upstream have been accepting and responsive to any <br></div><div>and all improvements to their CMake support, that is irrelevant until <br></div><div>they explicitly bless it as an equal to autotools. (Not to say autotools <br></div><div>is perfect either, far from it)<br></div><div><br></div><div>Personally, between the two choices here, I prefer CMake. But personal <br></div><div>preferences are irrelevant wrt liability and support issues.<br></div><div><br></div><div>-- <br></div><div>Charlie Li<br></div><div>...nope, still don't have an exit line.<br></div></pre></blockquote></div><div>Hi,<br></div><div><br></div><div>That's a bit contractionary? We upstream patches, community and others also do and yet there's a "support issue" despite autotools is "far from it" (perfect)? Why not embrace instead of obstructing? Please keep in mind ports is a joint / community effort which is why we have groups, guidelines etc and for custom trees there's overlay support for who want or need to diverge.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Best regards,<br></div><div>Daniel<br></div>home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?30d803b8ab6713c88aa8fe2c0e516e51>