Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:46:15 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: pav@FreeBSD.org Cc: emulation@FreeBSD.org, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/Mk bsd.port.mk bsd.port.subdir.mk bsd.xorg.mk Message-ID: <20080312114615.tcssgxahkck04c8s@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <1205316953.51779.13.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> References: <200803112345.m2BNj4Hj051138@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080312110416.rvewfpfrqcgswo0c@webmail.leidinger.net> <1205316953.51779.13.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> (from Wed, 12 Mar 2008 =20 11:15:53 +0100): > Alexander Leidinger p=C3=AD=C5=A1e v st 12. 03. 2008 v 11:04 +0100: >> Quoting Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> (from Tue, 11 Mar 2008 >> 23:45:04 +0000 (UTC)): >> >> > - Teach USE_LDCONFIG to do the right thing when used with =20 >> USE_LINUX_PREFIX >> > >> > PR: ports/118212 >> > http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3D118212 >> > Original patch: vd >> > Patch by: pav >> >> I would like to know why emulation@ was not in the loop for this. >> >> At >> http://www.leidinger.net/FreeBSD/port-patches/Mk:bsd.port.mk.diff > > I wasn't aware of this patch. Is it mentioned in a PR assigned to > portmgr anywhere? No PR. I mentioned it once on emulation@ I think. But it's been a =20 while. I would have expected that a linux related patch would be =20 presented for review on emulation@. > If I ignore not-ldconfig related changes in your patch, the > functionality should be equivalent. I do not need to set > NO_LDCONFIG_MTREE, because that code branch is never reached. Good. > My code goes like if (linux) { do linux stuff } else { do native stuff } > Your code went like if (linux) { setup some variables } else { setup > some variables} endif; do { common stuff }. Yes (regarding the behavior of my patch). > Only difference I see is that you condition the use of linux mdconfig by > presence of USE_LINUX, I need USE_LINUX_PREFIX, which is more strict, I > think. It depends upon your point of view: - we have ports which use USE_LINUX but not USE_LINUX_PREFIX - every port (except the base ports) needs to use USE_LINUX (the base ports are very special, we use ldconfig by hand there anyway) - Ports which don't install into LINUXBASE have no business using USE_LDCONFIG (libs which need to be cached for the run-time linker need to go into LINUXBASE) So it would be stricter in my point of view to use USE_LINUX. I can =20 understand when you say, that it is stricter by using USE_LINUX_PREFIX =20 (a different point of view). The question is now, if USE_LINUX_PREFIX is sufficient. Do we have =20 ports which install into LOCALBASE and LINUXBASE, and if yes, do they =20 install libs into LINUXBASE? emulation@ does not own a port which =20 installs into both, but emulation@ does not own all linux ports. The =20 nvidia driver installs into both, but does it _need_ (which is !=3D =20 "use") USE_LDCONFIG (I haven't checked)? Every port which installs into both locations, needs to use USE_LINUX, =20 but may not use USE_LINUX_PREFIX. So I would say it is at least =20 failsave to make this dependent upon USE_LINUX. It may be beneficial =20 to also check the argument for USE_LDCONFIG in the linux case. Only =20 "yes" (or similar) makes sense here. BTW: Thanks for working on this, it's on my TODO list for too long. Bye, Alexander. --=20 Some people cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080312114615.tcssgxahkck04c8s>