On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 01:04:20 -0700 Stanislav Sedov <s...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:59:38 +0300 > Ion-Mihai Tetcu <ite...@freebsd.org> mentioned: > > > Unfortunately we don't seem to have any other way to go, for the (and yes, I hate the idea) > > big majority of the ports. The fix is basically identical, so it > > doesn't make sense to have a zillion of patch files in a zillion of > > ports. > > What, on the other hand, makes sense is to have the fix that should > > include: > > a) a KNOB (WITH_FBSD10_FIX or similar), > > b) that only is run from bsd.port.mk when OSVERSION>1000000 > > c) runs the latest version of the above patch. > > The KNOB's existence allow us to turn on the fix only for broken > > ports, and easily know what these broken ports are -- so we can poke > > maintainers from time to time about upstream fixes, ... > > Sounds good to me. A few more days. > > Presumably $UPSTREAM wants it software to be able to build on > > FreeBSD even outside the PT, especially if this doesn't imply much > > work on his part. > > You'd be surprized how many of them do not care about FreeBSD > altogether. Even if you send them patches. Oh, I know, believe I know. But that's not the majority, and anyway it should stop us trying to do the right thing. -- IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" FreeBSD committer -> ite...@freebsd.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"