From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 19 01:53:48 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 89D8E1065672; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 01:53:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 01:53:48 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: "Philip M. Gollucci" Message-ID: <20100819015348.GA33482@FreeBSD.org> References: <201008181153.o7IBrvlo010634@repoman.freebsd.org> <20100818184746.GA43513@FreeBSD.org> <4C6C6159.5060800@p6m7g8.com> <20100819005838.GA24811@FreeBSD.org> <4C6C8324.3030303@p6m7g8.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C6C8324.3030303@p6m7g8.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, Andrej Zverev , ports-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/p5-Config-Model Makefile distinfo pkg-plist X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 01:53:48 -0000 On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 01:04:36AM +0000, Philip M. Gollucci wrote: > On 08/19/10 00:58, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 10:40:25PM +0000, Philip M. Gollucci wrote: > >>> 2010/8/18 Alexey Dokuchaev : > >>>> Please assign RUN_DEPENDS correctly with := (immediate expansion > >>>> operator). Right now it is polluted with `devel/p5-Module-Build' and > >>>> extra one of `lang/perl5.10'. Consider attached patch. Point the > >>>> original submitter to section 5.7.2 of PH. > >> > >> We're actually moving away from that. Fewer then 100 ports use this > >> right now. Whats prefered is to list the BUILD/RUN depends explicitly > >> which portlint tells you to do. > > > > I actually indent to fix portlint(1) in that regard. I do not see we > > should avoid doing handy things like bdeps to rdeps assignment just > > because someone(tm) believes it's too hard for maintainers/committers to > > know make(1) well enough. > > That actually works both ways. := and X=Y Y+=Z expanding later > with unwanted additions are (apparently) equally unknown features. > > I'm not contending one way is better then the other. What I'm saying is > that 95% of the tree, the handbook, and portlint is already 1 way. > Flipping it creates a ton of work to bring things in line [even over time]. I do not plan to convert any existing Makefiles (at least en masse), but I do not want portlint(1) to tell to avoid perfectly fine and a lot more clear way of doing the task just because it requires little extra care to do correctly. I also do not share "[smth] is an unknown feature" arguments. Aren't we supposed to know our tools thoroughly? Heck, it is all in the manpage, there ain't no black magic about it. ./danfe