From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Feb 18 2:11:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from gratis.grondar.za (grouter.grondar.za [196.7.18.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3009637B503 for ; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 02:11:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from grondar.za (root@gratis.grondar.za [196.7.18.133]) by gratis.grondar.za (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1I9b9957438; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:37:13 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Message-Id: <200102180937.f1I9b9957438@gratis.grondar.za> To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Moving Things [was Re: List of things to move from main tree] References: <11284.982487979@winston.osd.bsdi.com> In-Reply-To: <11284.982487979@winston.osd.bsdi.com> ; from Jordan Hubbard "Sun, 18 Feb 2001 01:19:39 PST." Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:37:47 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Absolutely, we're in violent agreement on that point. I'm just > suggesting that instead of having the policy be represented by > SUBDIR lines in Makefiles, it should instead be something like > this: > > > > FreeBSD-standard > RELENG_4 > This is what constitutes the "standard" version of FreeBSD > > bin > lib > usr > etc > installer > > OK - this is looking like something that can be played with! I'll take the above example end spend some time seeing if I can come up with some proof-of-concept code. > And when I say something "like" that I'm really reaching because this > is a seriously contrived example which doesn't even begin to enumerate > all the various types of meta-data which one would need to describe > "the standard release of FreeBSD." I'm not even saying it would be in > XML (please put those spears down), only that it would live outside of > the actual build mechanism and simply become configuration data. Right. Personally, i like XML, but the XML support stuff is big, and that scares me. > Such a thing would also finally get rid of all those evil and > not-very-comprehensive NO_FOO variables in the source tree, as if > any of us truly needed to see a list of our current build system's > shortcomings. Right! "Violent agreement", was it? > And yes, I do also realize that coming up with something even half as > sophisticated as what I've described so far will take more than lots > of mere hand-waving on the subject. Progress often moves in strange > ways, so let's just see where all this goes. :-) M -- Mark Murray Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message