Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:38:59 -0800 (PST) From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <giffunip@yahoo.com> To: Simon Barner <barner@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/78687: Warning cleanups for graphics/URT port Message-ID: <20050311233859.22493.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: 6667
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Simon Barner <barner@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> [Cc'ed freebsd-ports, further discussion should happen there]
>
OK..I reduced the CC list.
> Hello Pedro, others,
>
> IMHO these kinds of patches do not belong into the ports collection in
> the first place. While they are correct, and reduce the number of
> compiler warnings and improve the general quality of the code, they are
> not necessary to make the software run on FreeBSD.
>
Actually if someone wants to build the BRLCAD fb support some of them will be
necessary. The idea is, also, that if gcc (or ICC or TenDRA) is stricter in the
future it will not break URT (it has happened before), or at least that it will
not make be a nightmare to fix it again.
> Is there any chance to have those changes integrated upstream, i.e. by
> the authors of URT?
>
No, URT is not actively maintained anymore. It is part of BRLCAD, but I've been
trying to convince them to un-bundle it so we that we can use our port. I hope
they also unbundle Tcl, Tk, itcl, iTk, and iwidgets it's very bulky package
(the last three need updating in our ports tree too).
> If that's not the case (because the software is abandoned), or the do
> not plan a new release within a reasonable timeframe, I'd prefer to have
> those patches bundled in one file, say patch-FIX-WARNINGS, so that our
> repository is not clobbered with a dozend of small, non-FreeBSD specific
> patches.
>
Something like this happened with Spice and XView.. it was a mess to break up
the patches afterwards to make sure we were not patching a file twice or in
conflicting ways. I did the cleaning of those ports because I had some
responsability in that happening, but I won't do the same mistake again for
URT.
> So, to sum this up: I really appreciate your work very much, but IMO the
> ports collection is not the best place to store your patches.
>
Admitedly I didn't explain this very well: The patch contains cleanups and some
minor fixes, but it also paves the way for building-in new functionality so
that I can avoid re-building URT with BRLCAD.
> Perhaps someone else from the ports@ list can share her/his opinion with
> us?
>
I'm surely glad to receive feedback, and if someone else wants to maintain URT
I'll be glad to let him/her know my requirements.
cheers,
Pedro.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050311233859.22493.qmail>