From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 2 14:29:50 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A32AE106566B; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:29:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-f182.google.com (mail-ob0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D2808FC08; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:29:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obbwc20 with SMTP id wc20so6762440obb.13 for ; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 07:29:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=yMr25PEYOSjTSQbPntob1x4MGkqjurBBoNIbBfEp8ts=; b=W9/WfWyAB9+Z0jZc73axkCamQGvmnokjjnKbbt9o0aESQR1N/GXYSAKAsO2+piib6X 8aukgtyYcbo3tgGX4+BlEiVaN808Gdj64LuSX9zzXVK8tIhYjDxfeqwiRyv9eGnWVTPT sicfD+HEFaAz2ZthZ88tZ/zbnMmVwQG2KIPZIE58Ej8yAQlXr7ZAr+g5i2d0ho0uXWOa 3lw6Ltm98Fj5WM2HN8PJjge2hwXMojOTe4bXZ8D4JSP6njw1h2SYi8EEs7MnTaJQsZCz AUbKJStFLAOKEBkkjkqjJuN8XGzLDjU/oQe9/UO4Xb2VpGX7E+8zTSxAzwH9DBzvq3Hz wilw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.231.66 with SMTP id te2mr5485610obc.67.1349188189334; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 07:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.142.201 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 07:29:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201210020750.23358.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20121001223100.E7D0D58093@chaos.jnpr.net> <201210020750.23358.jhb@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 07:29:49 -0700 Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: John Baldwin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, "Simon J. Gerraty" , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fwd: [CFT/RFC]: refactor bsd.prog.mk to understand multiple programs instead of a singular program X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 14:29:50 -0000 On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 4:50 AM, John Baldwin wrote: ... > This sounds like a superior approach. It doesn't break any current use > cases while giving the ability to build multiple programs in the few > places that need it. It sounds like there are a few places under gnu/ > from Garrett's reply that might be able to make use of this as well. For the record, gnu/cc/cc_tools/Makefile is where I first spotted a potential "bsd.progs.mk" candidate. Most of the other code doesn't care given how things are organized in our source tree. > BTW, one general comment. There seem to be two completely independent > groups of folks working on ATF (e.g. there have been two different > imports of ATF into the tree in two different locations IIRC, and now > we have two different sets of patches to our system makefiles). > > Are these two groups talking to each other at all? I know in May that > many folks (certainly multiple vendors) are interested in ATF, and it > seems that both Juniper and Isilon have ported ATF internally. It seems > that it might be good for the two groups to work together to avoid > stomping on each other's toes. It seems there are some differences in > the two approaches that merit working out to avoid a lot of wasted > effort on both sides. Both parties (Isilon/Juniper) are converging on the ATF porting work that Giorgos/myself have done after talking at the FreeBSD Foundation meet-n-greet. I have contributed all of the patches that I have other to marcel for feedback. > Do we already have a freebsd-atf@ mailing list? If not, perhaps we > should create one and start these discussions there? Probably wouldn't be a bad idea as I'm currently suspended a bit waiting on feedback for how to proceed; too bad freebsd-test is being used for other things :).. Thanks! -Garrett