From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 31 23:33:22 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E0B6E7A; Sat, 31 Aug 2013 23:33:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from madpilot@FreeBSD.org) Received: from winston.madpilot.net (winston.madpilot.net [78.47.75.155]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9068529CA; Sat, 31 Aug 2013 23:33:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from winston.madpilot.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winston.madpilot.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3cSDQ846RgzFTBl; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 01:33:20 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at madpilot.net Received: from winston.madpilot.net ([127.0.0.1]) by winston.madpilot.net (winston.madpilot.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12Nr6wvqnbGd; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 01:33:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from marvin.madpilot.net (micro.madpilot.net [88.149.173.206]) by winston.madpilot.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Sun, 1 Sep 2013 01:33:18 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <52227D3D.9020109@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2013 01:33:17 +0200 From: Guido Falsi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130809 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Boris Samorodov Subject: Re: ports libiconv -> base iconv References: <201308300952.r7U9qKsF026518@svn.freebsd.org> <52206DF8.1000401@FreeBSD.org> <5221CEB4.7090109@passap.ru> <5221FD7C.1040501@FreeBSD.org> <5222414D.10209@passap.ru> <5222513F.4020403@passap.ru> In-Reply-To: <5222513F.4020403@passap.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Baptiste Daroussin , Dimitry Andric , Peter Wemm , FreeBSD ports list X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 23:33:22 -0000 On 08/31/13 22:25, Boris Samorodov wrote: > 31.08.2013 23:17, Boris Samorodov пишет: > >> (let's change the subject to a more apropriate) >> >> 31.08.2013 18:28, Guido Falsi пишет: >> >>> I have spent a few hours experimenting and produced this PR: >>> >>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/181693 > > Guido, here are some notes about your PR and patches. > > There are two patches. Seems that the second one is not needed. > Is it? Unluckily it was a little mangled by gnats, it's one single patch, but gnats split it due to a piece it was not understanding. I'm creating another updated patch I'll send as a followup avoiding parts(props changes) which could confuse gnats! > > I know it's very time consuming and thanks for your work, but... > I would not recommend to include at the patch changes not linked > with the matter. Ports are changing (headers, optionsNG, LIB_DEPENDS > syntax, etc.) -- it may be extreamly difficult to you to create a patch > which is ready to test by portmgr, then do some changes to the patch > and then finally to get a patch which is ready to commit. Actually it > doesn't apply _now_ (several hours after submitting a PR!), not to say > in a week or two... BTW, failed hunks are almost all have number 1, so > headers are changing rapidly. This is the first time I work with such a big patch, I'm not sure what is the best way to work with it. Maybe the exp run could be run against a specific revision of the ports tree with which the patch applies. This could be a way to get some result even if not against the latest tree, it would be just a few days behind at most. > > And I have a question about the amount of ports at your patch. > I grepped the first patch for "Index" and got 97 files. So you patch > about a hundred ports. Then I grepped the portstree makefiles for > "iconv" and got 778 ports (let's assume some are false positives, so > actual amout may be aroud 700). So the question is: are those 600 > untouched ports currently ready to use base iconv (well, after bmk > changes)? If yes, then our portstree is at a good state! (Well, maybe > those that just have USES=iconv are ready?) I mainly centered my attention on the ones with USES=iconv, which were the ones I saw failing most, since most of those have pieces in the Makefiles to force the ported software to link against libiconv.so in /usr/local. I asked for the exp run for the specific reason I'd like to get a better idea of what is the shape of our ports tree, and to get a better understanding of how hard the task of switching to lib iconv could really be. From the subset of ports I have tested this (around 1200, mainly the ones I use in some way) it looks to me that our ports tree isn't in bad shape. On the 1200 ports I use I had to patch just a few, around 12. Most ports seem to just do the right thing anyway. In fact if it wasn't for cups and a pair of other high profile ones failing I wouldn't have noticed the problem at all! > > Sorry, I did just a quick glance at the matter, so you may understand it > better. I beg your pardon if I'm terribly wrong. Thanks! > It is quite possible it's me being terribly wrong. That's what I'm trying to ascertain. :) I'm just at the first steps in this, I still need a few days to test it all completely, and study a correct update path for all users. -- Guido Falsi