Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 18 Aug 2005 02:28:04 +0200
From:      Benjamin Lutz <benlutz@datacomm.ch>
To:        Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: prebuild sanity checks
Message-ID:  <4303D614.2090702@datacomm.ch>
In-Reply-To: <20050818001258.GA14367@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
References:  <20050817195839.GA22027@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <4303CF35.400@datacomm.ch> <20050818001258.GA14367@odin.ac.hmc.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig1B5DEB161D95C0E6120F80C3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>>>Another option might be a new variable (or variables) that ports that
>>>tend to break spectacularly and unobviously can set like:
>>>
>>>BUILD_DEVS=	null zero
>>
>>As a potential user of such a variable, I wonder how I'm supposed to
>>figure out which basic system facilities are required by a given piece
>>of software.
>
> Either by having it fail and debugging it or by doing a build with one
> of the common culprates missing from devfs.  In theory it would see that
> you could do a periodic sweep using the package cluster.

I can't test every possible environment as a ports maintainer. I can't
even test every possible standard FreeBSD release. If there's just 10
different things that are being tested for, the cluster would have to
test for each of them in turn - sounds like quite a bit of work with
13000 ports.

>>I think the right thing to do here would be to have the software react
>>more sensibly to such a problem, ie bail out with an error message. In
>>other words: have the people upstream change their software.
>
> In theory yes.  In practice, I'm sure a lot of software authors won't
> care about supporting this environment.

True. As a ports maintainer, I'm afraid to say, neither do I.

I can see the value of this though. I've set up a couple of jails too, I
know how annoying it can be to track down dependencies. Why not start
collecting data on which software needs which system facilities outside
the ports system? Set up a website with a public database/wiki? That
way, non-FreeBSD users would be helped too.

Cheers
Benjamin

--------------enig1B5DEB161D95C0E6120F80C3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFDA9YXgShs4qbRdeQRAhQXAKCERH4Bs4W0PLbvPoVBoNNe0CC0kgCgkdEr
YPzZ6AWBjC6zCH9V3XeQ6x0=
=Yrd9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig1B5DEB161D95C0E6120F80C3--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4303D614.2090702>