From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 13 15:10:17 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B30BC16A4CE for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:10:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 766E143D41 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:10:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id C4E6C149D0; Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:10:16 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:10:16 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark Linimon X-X-Sender: linimon@pancho To: Alexander Leidinger In-Reply-To: <20050413122034.0c3fsbwxusw0ss4w@netchild.homeip.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: Mark Linimon cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: cleanup of linux ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:10:17 -0000 On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Mark Linimon wrote: > > > This logic also assumes that anything that isn't a partial portname > > or '7' should be the default. This seems wrong. IMHO after the > > test for '7' should be a test for 'yes', which sets whatever is the > > current default (currently 8). Any other value should set IGNORE. > > I did this because USE_LINUX was a trigger variable before. If set to any > value (even "no"), it triggered a dependency to the default linux base. It got changed not to be a pure trigger variable in 1.505, when the acceptable value '7' was added. Now we have the worst of both worlds. If it can have multiple values then we have to test for illegal values and reject them via IGNORE. Implicit in this is going and fixing the two current cases where the value is not 'yes'. Otherwise IMHO this is completely fragile. Again, consider what happens when someone sets 'USE_LINUX=rh-7' which they might reasonably expect to do since they can set it to 'rh-9'. It should fail, not silently give them RH 8. As well, I see this fragility as an opportunity to shoot ourselves in the foot when changing default versions in the future. mcl