Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:12:40 -0700 From: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> To: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> Cc: Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Instafix for FreeBSD ports brokenness on 10.0? Message-ID: <20110929161240.461ceda8.stas@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgmvEJsNoWJVEqJm5PKzg199_jRHyWYb=tk5zMatuTELtw@mail.gmail.com> References: <20110929084725.GN91943@hoeg.nl> <20110929094733.GS5495@droso.net> <20110929134626.8c019ef1.stas@FreeBSD.org> <CAF6rxgmvEJsNoWJVEqJm5PKzg199_jRHyWYb=tk5zMatuTELtw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:40:36 -0400
Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> mentioned:
> The ports tree can be very fickle and touching a large class of ports
> requires multiple exp-runs. Attempting these types of changes
> just prior to release adds a degree of risk which no one wants to accept.
>
Who don't want to accept this?
Who is making this decision for everyone?
> Affecting *every single port* is not a negligible risk.
I can easily commit whatever I want to bsd.ruby.mk right now
affecting all the ports (and nobody will say a word), but we can't
do a conditional fix in bsd.port.mk? I'd say the first one poses
much a higher risk (and I never did a single exp-run for that).
Seriously, just look at the commits happening right now. Here's
one example (the most recent commit, not picking up anything):
15:22 < CIA-28> [ports] glarkin * devel/Makefile: - Hook py-zope.interface to the build
So now tell me how
.if ${OSVERION} > SOMETHING
do something
.endif
in bsd.port.mk
is more risky then that particular commit which can potentially break
devel/ for all OSVERSIONs.
--
Stanislav Sedov
ST4096-RIPE
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110929161240.461ceda8.stas>