Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 17:08:00 -0500 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9_Ladan?= <rene@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [cfr] patch to clean up old Linux ports Message-ID: <CAF6rxgnS6Qfprbh6ZjvJosrUj8dXda9G=k%2Bkd5cUc3_E8t8j6Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <513BA5E7.40802@freebsd.org> References: <513A0C04.8090907@freebsd.org> <20130309121625.00004279@unknown> <513B2CB3.1020405@passap.ru> <20130309141403.0000340e@unknown> <513B3D0E.2030603@passap.ru> <513BA5E7.40802@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9 March 2013 16:13, Ren=C3=A9 Ladan <rene@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 09-03-2013 14:45, Boris Samorodov wrote: >> 09.03.2013 17:14, Alexander Leidinger =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: >>> On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:36:03 +0400 >>> Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru> wrote: >>>> 09.03.2013 15:16, Alexander Leidinger =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: >>>> >>>>> 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. +1. The place to protect against user error is not in the Linux specific portion of the tree. --=20 Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgnS6Qfprbh6ZjvJosrUj8dXda9G=k%2Bkd5cUc3_E8t8j6Q>