From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 22 21:46:16 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2C2D880; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 21:46:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-x234.google.com (mail-we0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C71B11A0; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 21:46:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f180.google.com with SMTP id k48so68574wev.11 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 14:46:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=e0DZc9FiYk2cjdWpNIN7AASHYW254ok80m+KPMqnXic=; b=vcD7p4OFATs7q6UZ8phMZOzkOHH4qC5Cl7uNyvSmEi/A67SP9n7RwBgTSkahq3Lk0a UiGmCDsHBw7ChVSnUNV9R6nTBUaQKSFJnv++H3LeEUdP5nYphTuKTO6r2Ry5Zn1DwoAV iqnoVd7ie44HRg+6yMOHOMwcqd8dSMmsf686caf58uKdOhXImTCc3PW/PMg4wOcQL8da w6EmBkVwHNOLomrhDScGnAIiKLubZzAE+qF1QiODhpJbqBV/DyBTb7gtcz85n5IzTX6Q tp9nYi/0Azabk9vRqHIwZD+T9QzO/TFILPZzr7strr36QdE+p9Oai9q1TB+q6PoE+fQw dGEQ== X-Received: by 10.180.84.129 with SMTP id z1mr291567wiy.8.1398203174394; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 14:46:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net ([2001:41d0:8:db4c::1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id by1sm63594868wjc.26.2014.04.22.14.46.12 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Apr 2014 14:46:13 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Baptiste Daroussin Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 23:46:11 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Julio Merino Subject: Re: Can fmake be deleted? Message-ID: <20140422214610.GC63561@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> References: <20140422202506.GA63561@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jy6Sn24JjFx/iggw" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: sjg@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 21:46:17 -0000 --jy6Sn24JjFx/iggw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 02:37:14PM -0700, Julio Merino wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wr= ote: > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 01:20:46PM -0700, Julio Merino wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> The WITHOUT_BMAKE=3Dyes build has been broken for over a month and, as > >> far as I can tell, only tinderbox noticed... (Should be fixed with a > >> commit I made yesterday but tinderbox hasn't caught up yet.) > >> > >> Question: is there any reason to keep the old fmake around or could it > >> be deleted along all the MK_BMAKE logic? > >> > > At least for the ports side the plan is to drop fmake support as soon as > > possible. >=20 > What does that mean? >=20 > - Can ports drop support for fmake before fmake is removed from base? That is the plan, as long as all supported version of FreeBSD has bmake installed. We haven't got through the details yet :) >=20 > - Can fmake be removed from base even if ports hasn't yet dropped its > support for fmake? Yes as right now we do support both >=20 > Thanks Bapt --jy6Sn24JjFx/iggw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlNW4yIACgkQ8kTtMUmk6EzeRgCdFohQh3joiP61jvwmXCPI2bbE 7PcAoI4ML8VitU83qfw2JfgwiBkbH6vC =dSps -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jy6Sn24JjFx/iggw--