Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 11:55:27 +0200 From: Torsten Zuehlsdorff <freebsd@toco-domains.de> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@freebsd.org>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Replacing USE_GCC=any and the danfe@ filter (was: svn commit: r568012 - head/net/tightvnc) Message-ID: <0506d5b7-3a2e-89eb-8e72-238b7a3f3d4d@toco-domains.de> In-Reply-To: <64998e65-5200-ba36-eb61-f54b26a6e2a8@toco-domains.de> References: <f7316636-5fd2-cfd1-7661-3044fd782587@pfeifer.com> <20210603063235.676vy42y56fzvuu5@aching.in.mat.cc> <64998e65-5200-ba36-eb61-f54b26a6e2a8@toco-domains.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 03.06.21 11:50, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: > > > On 03.06.21 08:32, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 12:22:47AM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >>> On Sun, 30 May 2021, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >>>> Thank you for working on this. >>> >>> So, I was just ready to commit the next step and prepared a nice git >>> style commit message: >>> >>> Replace USE_GCC=any with USE_GCC=yes >>> USE_GCC=any has been equivalent to USE_GCC=yes in most cases (such >>> as i386 and amd64 since 12.x and depending on configuration 11.x, >>> most newer installations on other platforms, and 13.x across the >>> board). >>> Since commit 96c17633d90386b5bcf8 Mk/bsd.gcc.mk ... >>> >>> Alas, the danfe@ filter struck: >>> >>> remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (111/111), completed with 111 >>> local objects. >>> remote: >>> remote: >>> ================================================================ >>> remote: First line does not start with the regular >>> remote: category/port: subject >>> remote: >>> ================================================================ >>> >>> What now? >>> >>> Neither "*/*: Replace USE_GCC=any..." in the subject nor a couple dozen >>> individual commits strike me as desirable. >> >> *: Replace... works just fine. > > This seems to be a transcription of "It works around a rule which has > its purpose but should not be enforced 100% of the time". Also just for fun: this new rule violates our old rule about committing new ports. It was always start with "New port $cat/$name". Or have we changed this rule? Best, Torsten
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0506d5b7-3a2e-89eb-8e72-238b7a3f3d4d>