Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 23:56:22 -0300 From: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira <lioux@FreeBSD.org> To: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@p6m7g8.com> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, riggs@rrr.de, bf1783@gmail.com, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/multimedia/mencoder Makefile Message-ID: <20110726025646.74097.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here> In-Reply-To: <4E2D7EEC.8030600@p6m7g8.com> References: <201107200252.p6K2qZRb053515@repoman.freebsd.org> <CAGFTUwMZ5iAp=VvNZezX4fiGy2d5Ep6jaSWWUZp92KTobxkjsQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E2B2B82.1020506@FreeBSD.org> <4E2D7EEC.8030600@p6m7g8.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 02:33:56PM +0000, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 14:34:20 +0000
> From: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@p6m7g8.com>
> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
> CC: bf1783@gmail.com, "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com>, Mario Sergio
> Fujikawa Ferreira <lioux@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org,
> cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, riggs@rrr.de
> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/multimedia/mencoder Makefile
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16)
> Gecko/20110507 Thunderbird/3.0.11
>
> On 07/23/11 20:13, Doug Barton wrote:
> > On 07/22/2011 23:07, b. f. wrote:
> >
> >> I must renew my plea to avoid these "fixes". When a user sets
> >> WITH/WITHOUT_FOO, he means precisely "build this port
> >> WITH/WITHOUT_FOO", and not "build this port WITH/WITHOUT_FOO, except
> >> if package X is installed, and, if it is, silently do something else",
> >> and we should not be adding code to do the latter. We should instead
> >> patch the broken distribution configure scripts and Makefiles, so that
> >> the problem does not occur. If a lack of time or another problem
> >> prevents this from being done initially, then as a temporary
> >> workaround, we should add something like:
> >>
> >> .if exists(${LOCALBASE}/lib/libass.so) && defined(WITHOUT_ASS)
> >> BROKEN= libass is installed, so broken mplayer scripts will ignore WITHOUT_ASS
> >> .endif
> >>
> >> so that the user will know that his choice of options cannot be used,
> >> and he can take the appropriate action -- and he will not be misled
> >> into thinking that his choice of options are used when they are not.
> >
> > +1
> >
> Yes, I agree violently too. I even remember removing about 10
> occurrences in the past.
Okay, I agree in principle. Whatever the user decides should be
upheld. I hate when a port disagrees with me. However, the reality
is that mplayer configure structure is broken and we can build it
with this.
The situation is as follows for those who might not be following:
---
A) if multimedia/libass is not installed:
1. mplayer/mencoder build just fine with the internal code supplied
B) if multimedia/libass is installed:
2. mplayer/mencoder only builds if we fix configure script and
force port dependend on multimedia/libass because mplayer's
configure is broken.
---
Is multimedia/libass easily available? Yeah, because multimedia/vlc
depends on it and lots (if not most) users building mplayer, should
have already built vlc. So this problem is pretty standard for many
users.
The suggestion I've been reading is that we mark the port as
BROKEN? Well, then first we need to decide some other things (and
this has been an age long discussion on the institution of ports):
1) What should be our standard policy for ports? What is the main
reason we have ports?
I believe we have ports to have applications working on FreeBSD
out of the box with as many options as we want, not just the packaged
standard options. We back port as much fixes as possible so that
we don't have to keep fixing. However, the foremost reason for ports
is having things WORKING out of the box. That's just my 2 cents. I
know how to build-fix-tweak my way around a broken 'portupgrade -a'
but that's not the average user .... and we also want the average
user.
Ports do not exist to teach the user. They exist to work.
Maintainers and developers exist to teach each other. And, we try
to educate the user whenever the opportunity presents itself.
2) Do we have policy exceptions on ports standards? Or, does the
same policy apply to every single situation?
We do have policy exceptions today which I will not name and we
will keep having them because not all ports are born equal. And,
that is that. Some ports are more important than others and they
are entitled to special treatment (I am not making a case for
mplayer, just making a point).
I apologize if the email seems to be inflamatory. I read it twice
to try working out more subtle wording but I think I couldn't. I
apologize again.
To sum up. My point is this: Is the ports system a community
service or a user teaching ground? Do we give mplayer special
dispensation on this or do we devise/appy a policy here?
We need a middle ground: the port should uphold the user but it
should also build if it's not too difficult. Marking it BROKEN when
it's so easily "fixable" is too harsh a decision.
Please, revert the commit if that's the overall decision.
Nonetheless, let's keep up this thread because I still believe we
can reach common ground.
Best regards,
Mario Sergio
--
Mario S F Ferreira - DF - Brazil - "I guess this is a signature."
feature, n: a documented bug | bug, n: an undocumented feature
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110726025646.74097.qmail>