Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 17:38:30 -0500 From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> To: jhell <jhell@DataIX.net> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, skv@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: _PERL_REFACTORING_COMPLETE lang/perl5.12 Mk/bsd.perl.mk Message-ID: <20100718223830.GA10338@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1007181813540.22190@pragry.qngnvk.ybpny>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The intention of bsd.perl.mk was to eventually allow a bunch of code to be pulled out of bsd.port.mk, and to have bsd.perl.mk only included conditionally, on the theory that it will speed up INDEX building somewhat. (I have not tested for speedup). The problem is that there are N ports that assume that the logic in bsd.perl.mk is always available. I've tried to convince people that these are bugs, but OTOH if you leave out one of these definitions such as USE_PERL5 or PERL_CONFIGURE, and _PERL_REFACTORING_COMPLETE is defined, then INDEX breaks. Every once in a while I try to put in patches to force N to zero, but then I get stuck on wierd edge cases. This is why the switch has not been thrown. Every time I try to work on this, "something happens" and it gets shoved on the back-burner for several months. This has been going on for several years now ... At this point it may be better to just do the following: - unconditionally include bsd.perl.mk and get rid of the code duplication that is in bsd.port.mk. This would avoid the possibility of optimizing INDEX speed, but instead, keep things robust. What do people think? mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100718223830.GA10338>