Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 20:02:46 +0200 From: John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> To: Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org>, marino@freebsd.org Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Oliver Lehmann <oliver@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r357767 - head/net/cyphesis Message-ID: <539C8E46.1010803@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <20140614175243.GD67971@mouf.net> References: <201406141111.s5EBBCgV016094@svn.freebsd.org> <539C8682.3030603@marino.st> <20140614175243.GD67971@mouf.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6/14/2014 19:52, Steve Wills wrote: > On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 07:29:38PM +0200, John Marino wrote: >> On 6/14/2014 13:11, Oliver Lehmann wrote: >>> Author: oliver >>> Date: Sat Jun 14 11:11:11 2014 >>> New Revision: 357767 >>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/357767 >>> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r357767/ >>> >>> Log: >>> mark as BROKEN (Does not compile with clang) >>> >> >> >> But FreeBSD 8 and 9 are still supported, and it builds on those: >> http://portsmon.freebsd.org/portoverview.py?category=net&portname=cyphesis >> >> So marking this unconditionally broken breaks it on those platforms, and >> DragonFly too. >> >> It seems to me the action to take is: >> 1) fix it so builds regardless of compiler >> 2) nothing. (F8, F9, + DF is better than broken everywhere. > > Wouldn't the right thing be to mark it broken on FreeBSD 8 and 9 only, via > conditionals? No. If you were going to test for anything, you'd test for clang, not the platform. Secondly, what's the benefit of marking it broken? For people that try to build it via source? To save the builder the effort of trying? I don't think there's much benefit and in this case, there's a distinct downside. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?539C8E46.1010803>