From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Aug 9 9:10:35 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from hub.lovett.com (hub.lovett.com [216.60.121.161]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6993437BE78; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 09:10:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ade@lovett.com) Received: from ade by hub.lovett.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 13MYQn-000JNv-00; Wed, 09 Aug 2000 11:10:13 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 11:10:13 -0500 From: Ade Lovett To: David O'Brien Cc: asmai@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Diking out ports a.out support Message-ID: <20000809111013.C71732@FreeBSD.org> References: <20000623080800.F77304@argon.gryphonsoft.com> <3953573F.7B95B83E@FreeBSD.org> <20000623094306.I44870@FreeBSD.org> <20000628221306.G31775@dragon.nuxi.com> <20000629103349.D31932@lovett.com> <20000701231144.A68949@mad> <20000701225008.C20888@FreeBSD.org> <20000701235931.C69938@argon.gryphonsoft.com> <20000731081113.I735@FreeBSD.org> <20000809025143.C97174@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20000809025143.C97174@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@FreeBSD.org on Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 02:51:43AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 02:51:43AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > I still don't see why we need to do this. We already have the machanism > in place, so why not leave it? I'll repeat my reasons: 1. The handbook quite clearly states that ports only support STABLE and CURRENT. If it happens to work on anything else, then that's a fluke. 2. Those people running a.out systems (which basically means 2.x, 3.0-RELEASE with a.out was a mess) are doing so for reasons of stability, and thus would be unlikely to be installing new ports 3. For a substantial amount of time, new port submissions have been developed on the basis of ELF support only (eg: in shared library naming etc.). In addition, such new ports (and port upgrades) are likely to be depending on other ports for which there is no a.out support at all. 4. With the advent of 4.1-RELEASE, we have had 7 releases (3.1 and up) since a purely a.out system existed 5. Neither -STABLE nor -CURRENT have the tools available to build a.out programs, meaning that they cannot be verified by the bento ports building cluster -- indeed, I would hope to see 3.x support disappear soon(ish), since at the moment, to do a "proper" job, ports maintainers already have to verify their ports on 3 different systems -- in my view, this is unreasonable to expect Think of this as taking an axe off the wall that has been sitting around waiting to be used for some time. That time has now come. src/ has long since abandoned a.out -- it is only reasonable that now, especially after an extended period, ports/ follow. Satoshi seems to be in agreement, along with other "prominent" members of the ports team. We can't keep legacy support around forever. The first stage of removing a.out support (in my eyes) will be to visit each port individually, and remove any hacks revolving around PORTOBJFORMAT. We can leave your ports alone at this stage if you so wish. The next step, however, would be to remove the PORTOBJFORMAT code from bsd.port.mk et al., at which point if you wish to continue to support a.out in your own ports, you will need to make the appropriate modifications to your Makefiles. Regards, -aDe -- 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