From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 25 14:35:24 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E42637B401 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.inka.de (quechua.inka.de [193.197.184.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5337B43FE9 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:35:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mailnull@mips.inka.de) Received: from kemoauc.mips.inka.de (uucp@) by mail.inka.de with gbsmtp id 19VHvG-00023R-03; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 23:35:22 +0200 Received: from kemoauc.mips.inka.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kemoauc.mips.inka.de (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h5PKZ5ih006870 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 22:35:05 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mailnull@localhost.mips.inka.de) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by kemoauc.mips.inka.de (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h5PKZ5OW006869 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 22:35:05 +0200 (CEST) From: naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 20:35:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Originator: naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Ports that don't run on !i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 21:35:24 -0000 When I pick up submissions for updates to unmaintained ports I do a test build and install. Sometimes I also do a minimal test run. And sometimes the port will not run on my -CURRENT/alpha, which I use for that work. A good many of those cases are very likely due to the port not working on alpha (and probably neither on several other of our !i386 platforms). What should I do? "Debug it and fix it!" Sorry, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to hunt this down for arbitrary ports I don't care for. I can bounce the update back to the submitters, who will probably give an apologetic shrug and point out that they in turn have only i386 boxes. And chances are, the port is already broken for alpha and the update won't change this. Vetoing updates will penalize i386 users, but not fix the problem elsewhere. I can slap a NOT_FOR_ARCHS=alpha on it, but that sounds too final. Nobody it going to try to fix a port once it is declared not to run. Besides, it's likely that there are more architectures affected. So far I've simply gone ahead and committed the update. I've been wondering whether I should send a heads-up "port xxx/yyy doesn't run on alpha" somewhere. Probably nobody will care, but it would be nice to register that bit of information somewhere. I could send a PR, but that will only go ignored and turn stale. So what should I do? -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de