From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 9 21:13:15 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86B2510C for ; Sat, 9 Mar 2013 21:13:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r.c.ladan@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wg0-x229.google.com (mail-wg0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::229]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B9EA47 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 2013 21:13:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id ds1so876742wgb.4 for ; Sat, 09 Mar 2013 13:13:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=jkWCnjskiq66v1V4Nt2tHflxTtZMBuwLdGYlBof+pTg=; b=Z5rLY6FUOoqPCmkPxoBxvh9G7pPfcfAzpOLuxb8aGpwa8DDUBzSn/iOKTvxeINkVUe 3WuepzxCcY1LyukW4d6v2ashINvMkAf0zUI3qCKY68uiYHJQD74JzUNMfI2g74T4JSAK Iap3tNZwyXOpfw/xAHDhhHvCRDbkCVCAQgSJ+y4G6x9IDaBHGHqkn/y5rLwrY8K3snzz VMr7WSNWphkklOTsRYk21H2gq/e3R02r+FfrY4nYsPQP+MHnuVpwAEKPp1PY350ord3q Ws5UEOgwJeVOTljuaPkA3soqSDi/1ILAG8M25z3PHyDlukTXJ9ZyS37iyREqGJukPZnZ gq9g== X-Received: by 10.180.97.132 with SMTP id ea4mr5008987wib.23.1362863594268; Sat, 09 Mar 2013 13:13:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:980:d7ed:1:5dc8:da6d:d9c0:871c? ([2001:980:d7ed:1:5dc8:da6d:d9c0:871c]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ex1sm7095355wib.7.2013.03.09.13.13.12 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 09 Mar 2013 13:13:13 -0800 (PST) Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9_Ladan?= Message-ID: <513BA5E7.40802@freebsd.org> Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2013 22:13:11 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgTGFkYW4=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130228 Thunderbird/17.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [cfr] patch to clean up old Linux ports References: <513A0C04.8090907@freebsd.org> <20130309121625.00004279@unknown> <513B2CB3.1020405@passap.ru> <20130309141403.0000340e@unknown> <513B3D0E.2030603@passap.ru> In-Reply-To: <513B3D0E.2030603@passap.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:13:15 -0000 On 09-03-2013 14:45, Boris Samorodov wrote: > 09.03.2013 17:14, Alexander Leidinger пишет: >> On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:36:03 +0400 >> Boris Samorodov wrote: >>> 09.03.2013 15:16, Alexander Leidinger пишет: >>> >>>> The EoL announcement made it clear that ports need to be marked >>>> broken if they don't work on 7, so it means the generic ports >>>> framework has no hard "doesn't work" (yet). >>> >>> As I understand the announcement, those "ports should be marked >>> broken", etc. should be done at RELENG_7_EOL tag. Otherwise there is >>> no sense at EOL itself. >> >> BROKEN is used to announce as soon as possible that it will not work, >> whereas e.g. a compile error on 7 could manifest it self after a long >> time of compiling something. >> >> Think also about those people which don't know that 7 is EoL, but still >> run portsnap. At one point they may want to install a port and then it >> fails. If there's no message what's wrong (the system needs to be >> updated), they may spend a lot of time to search the cause of the >> problem. With a little helpful message they know directly. > > I agree that a message (well, BROKEN or something else) should be > used to inform a user. But that may be done via one check/file. > Be it at bsd.ports.mk, bsd.linux.mk, etc. Why should HEAD track > individual ports for 7.x after EOL? And when should 7.x actually > be cleaned fro the portstree? There is no any other date for 7.x. > > OK, for those who continue use 7.x RELENG_7_EOL has been created. > And those ports committers who are interested in ports for 7.x > may use portstree with that particular tag. As well as those > users who continue to use FreeBSD 7.x. > I strongly attend to agree with Boris here. If we want to continue warning 7.X users for a while (1,6,12 months?) then it should both be much clearer and easier to just put a conditional IGNORE in bsd.port.mk than in thousands of individual (not only Linux) ports. Rene