Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 09:05:34 -0500 From: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org> To: David O'Brien <obrien@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: patches/ handling Message-ID: <20000607090533.D44242@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20000606210209.B20037@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@freebsd.org on Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 09:02:10PM -0700 References: <20000605184259.A21736@cichlids.cichlids.com> <20000606210209.B20037@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 09:02:10PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> Why can't the patches' code be wrapped by "#ifdef __alpha__" and have a
> single patch?
This will work fine for source patches.. I'm just wondering if there
are any other cases where we might have to patch other things
(like "portable" configure scripts) differently depending on
architecture.
If not, then IMHO, the whole patches.*/ thing is significantly
over-engineered at the moment - of course, if we start increasing
the number of FreeBSD platforms (IA64 and some parts of Sparc being
the next logical contenders), we may have to revisit this.
-aDe [still trying to locate a <$1k Alpha for ports checking,
enquire within.. :)]
--
Ade Lovett, Austin, TX. ade@FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://www.FreeBSD.org/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000607090533.D44242>