Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 23 Sep 2015 08:25:41 +0200
From:      Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r286995 - head/share/mk
Message-ID:  <20150923062541.GH16800@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net>
In-Reply-To: <56023395.2080904@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201508211515.t7LFFM0U028322@repo.freebsd.org> <56023395.2080904@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--y0Ed1hDcWxc3B7cn
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 10:07:33PM -0700, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> On 8/21/15 8:15 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
> > Author: imp
> > Date: Fri Aug 21 15:15:22 2015
> > New Revision: 286995
> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/286995
> >=20
> > Log:
> >   Document bsd.progs.mk, including its status as being strongly
> >   discouraged and that it will be going away as soon as is practicable.
> >=20
> > Modified:
> >   head/share/mk/bsd.README
>=20
> I find this functionality irreplaceable for simplicity. The alternative
> is more Makefiles for simple extra progs. Granted it has meta mode
> dirdeps issues but I think that is acceptable as there are other ways to
> address that.
>=20
> Where is this deprecation coming from? Is it just due to bapt's
> in-progress (but not working) patch at https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3444
> to remove bsd.progs.mk in place of PROGS in bsd.prog.mk?
>=20
> I would like to document PROGS properly. I had no idea how it worked
> until reading over it tonight. If the plan wasn't to remove PROGS itself
> I will do so.
>=20
This is the exact opposite.

the review comes from the fact that bsd.progs.mk is broken.and has not be f=
ixed
for a while. The brokenness comes from the fact it is including magically
bsd.prog.mk multiple times, the easiy to see brokenness is the fact that
everything defining FILES/SCRIPTS and other magic macros that bsd.prog.mk a=
ccept
via it multiple inputs will be reinstalled multiple times, one can fix thos=
e by
exhaustively adding overwrites of every single macros, but hat would be rea=
lly
tedious each time one of the thing included in bsd.prog.mk get modified or =
added

You can easily see that for all the bsd.tests.mk.

While I do really like the fonctionnality it is very complicticated to get =
it
working.

My work in progress version is eaily fixable by adding:
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2003-June/000906.html

And extending the above for LDFLAGS and CXXFLAGS.

Which had been rejected in the past multiple times :(

The subject came back again
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2010-September/010613.html

I think D3444 would be a good excuse to bring back the idea of perfiles spe=
cific
FLAGS. But I didn't want to wake up dead subject noone agreed on.

Best regards,
Bapt

--y0Ed1hDcWxc3B7cn
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iEYEARECAAYFAlYCReUACgkQ8kTtMUmk6ExP8gCggOaXf+BbdsVaLGO6Qd70kFAL
PZkAn0IoWKxxE80/2qDf8L6Jn3bunAcz
=uGdF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--y0Ed1hDcWxc3B7cn--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150923062541.GH16800>