Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 11:05:52 -0700 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD ports list <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: X11BASE still in use in ports Message-ID: <CAF6rxg=Mv0j4QnK0QTZDxVx=TqwNJMg0NSNHxKbOLwK9w=wbrQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4FE6F010.80609@FreeBSD.org> References: <4FE6F010.80609@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24 June 2012 03:46, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote: > I noticed a failure in one of my ports today while doing an upgrade, and > was embarrassed to find that it was due to my port still using X11BASE. > That led me to do a quick grep of the tree, which seems to indicate that > there are a non-zero number of uses of it which seem to be erroneous: When the patch was committed a exp-run was done. At the time any errors found were either fixed or worked around (by manually adding a X11BASE definition to the port's makefile). > http://people.freebsd.org/~dougb/x11base-ports.txt > > Note, some of these are actually Ok, I haven't made an attempt to filter > them out yet. > > Is there any interest in cleaning these up? Should we restore the > definition of X11BASE until all of the ports that are using it are fixed? I'd rather add it locally as a workaround to each port rather than add it globally. > I'm kind of surprised by this problem, since the usual way of removing > something like this is to make sure all of the consumers have been fixed > first. Frankly, I'm surprised too, given that we (x11@) did search for consumers of the variable. -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxg=Mv0j4QnK0QTZDxVx=TqwNJMg0NSNHxKbOLwK9w=wbrQ>