Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 18:31:27 -0700 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r284598 - head/share/mk Message-ID: <55E6516F.5000805@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4974.1438488939@chaos> References: <201506191456.t5JEuPDU074336@svn.freebsd.org> <55B8268A.5030305@FreeBSD.org> <4974.1438488939@chaos>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/1/15 9:15 PM, Simon J. Gerraty wrote: > Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >>> > > head/share/mk/local.sys.mk >> > >> > I'm bothered by the amount of local.* files committed in the tree. I >> > expect, as a user and working in a downstream product, that a local.* >> > file is MINE, not FREEBSD. The pattern of using 'local' is quite common >> > as a *user* file. > Yes that's exactly the point. > local*mk (and src*) do not get installed in /usr/share/mk, yet the > inlcudes exist as points for you to customize the behavior. > >> > Why are these named as such? It seems they should just be 'src.' with >> > .sinclude hooks for actual local overrides. > local* are name as such since that's all that bsd* should know about. > Providing for local customization. My concern is that checked in 'local' files should not be changed by FreeBSD. I should not have to fight conflicts of _my customizations_ against _FreeBSD customizations (against bmake upstream)_. There is so much logic in these local.* files, they seem more aptly named 'freebsd.*' as they seem to be intended to be customizations for FreeBSD, rather than optional customizations for a developer or other downstream consumer of FreeBSD. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55E6516F.5000805>