Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:06:41 +0000
From:      Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com>
To:        "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program
Message-ID:  <CADLo838%2BxXpYvmY53z4=Ka6Ys1E8AyLSRqwEFPQ1LU3powouvQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20121027211032.C161058094@chaos.jnpr.net>
References:  <201210020750.23358.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAGH67wTM1VDrpu7rS=VE1G_kVEOHhS4-OCy5FX_6eDGmiNTA8A@mail.gmail.com> <201210021037.27762.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAGH67wQffjVHqFw_eN=mfeg-Ac2Z6XBT5Hv72ev0kjjx7YH7SA@mail.gmail.com> <127FA63D-8EEE-4616-AE1E-C39469DDCC6A@xcllnt.net> <20121025211522.GA32636@dragon.NUXI.org> <3F52B7C9-A7B7-4E0E-87D0-1E67FE5D0BA7@xcllnt.net> <CAGH67wRw_n2_KwVz=DZkMpeJ4t8mMf965nxehHsDV-mzTnn5cA@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo839EUTF9bP8VD3L1_boY8i-w8B87yHGRR7Zx6wONFnSnEQ@mail.gmail.com> <20121025221244.GG3808@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20121026181152.GC44331@dragon.NUXI.org> <CADLo838vSnYm3LMr_6maQipAYtBTX%2BCCyEhC053cj_amgNJH=g@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo83-d0tDN8k5Lv9c5=6vQawVHSHZENfTpKzxe61OYqqxSeA@mail.gmail.com> <20121026204910.E1FFA58094@chaos.jnpr.net> <CADLo8383Y823kqKgBLHfx9CdCDuZQgVQSYwfuWq_29Hq7cYv=Q@mail.gmail.com> <20121026233225.54FB858094@chaos.jnpr.net> <CADLo839LZOdMp%2B%2B3PnbN91%2B5Lfzvm=_GNRRfVdVATYcXm9BVJg@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo83-UWuVALEacEoECzoi63PmWbt%2BBUjk0XhU2-wnO6pXT_A@mail.gmail.com> <20121027211032.C161058094@chaos.jnpr.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 27 October 2012 22:10, Simon J. Gerraty <sjg@juniper.net> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 19:53:56 +0100, Chris Rees writes:
>>I'm saying that it's unacceptable to expect people to change their
>>systems just to make the ports tree work after we have broken it on a
>>supposedly supported version.
>
> But there's no suggestion of that.
> The ports tree would take care of itself.
>
> The comment about fixing makefiles refered to the concern about things
> outside of base/ports.

>From your comment, I now understand that we aren't having the same
conversation :)

Please answer me these to check we're on the same page:

Are we planning to replace /usr/bin/make with bmake in the near future?

If yes, what changes are we going to make to the ports tree to ensure
that -CURRENT can still use it?

Chris



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo838%2BxXpYvmY53z4=Ka6Ys1E8AyLSRqwEFPQ1LU3powouvQ>