Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:02:38 -0600
Zhihao Yuan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The PR which updates all pure-* ports was passed to portmgr for a long
> time, since it seem that to put a
>
> .if defined(USE_PURE)
> .include "${PORTSDIR}/Mk/bsd.pure.mk"
> .endif
>
> In bsd.port.mk may a be better choice. Though Pure is not as popular
> as some languages like PHP or Python, but it does and it will have
> more ports than like Go. To include bsd.pure.mk under Mk/ can lower 2
> lines in ~20 ports (or I have to leave it under lang/pure's private
> directory).
How many pure ports are there ATM?
--
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
"Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> ite...@freebsd.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk
Currently, 12. Plus 3 committed, 1 unsubmitted, 3~4 planning to port. The
total existing addons are listed here:
http://code.google.com/p/pure-lang/wiki/Addons
I probably not going to port all of them, but this list is growing.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:02:38 -0600
> Zhihao Yuan wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The PR which updates all pure-* ports was passed to portmgr for a long
> > time, since it seem that to put a
> >
> > .if defined(USE_PURE)
> > .include "${PORTSDIR}/Mk/bsd.pure.mk"
> > .endif
> >
> > In bsd.port.mk may a be better choice. Though Pure is not as popular
> > as some languages like PHP or Python, but it does and it will have
> > more ports than like Go. To include bsd.pure.mk under Mk/ can lower 2
> > lines in ~20 ports (or I have to leave it under lang/pure's private
> > directory).
>
> How many pure ports are there ATM?
>
> --
> IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
> "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
> FreeBSD committer -> ite...@freebsd.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
>
--
Zhihao Yuan, nickname lichray
The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
___
4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/
___
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"
Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk
portmgr@:
Clang 3.0 is released and about to replace the clang-2.9 in ports.
Pure 0.47 in ports does not build with 3.0, so I must make sure
ports/161799 can be committed soon. From now on, 18 hours. If I do not
get a response from portmgr@ with in 18 hours, I'll assume my request,
to add the bsd.pure.mk script into /usr/ports/Mk, is rejected. Thanks.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Zhihao Yuan wrote:
> Currently, 12. Plus 3 committed, 1 unsubmitted, 3~4 planning to port. The
> total existing addons are listed here:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/pure-lang/wiki/Addons
>
> I probably not going to port all of them, but this list is growing.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:02:38 -0600
>> Zhihao Yuan wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > The PR which updates all pure-* ports was passed to portmgr for a long
>> > time, since it seem that to put a
>> >
>> > .if defined(USE_PURE)
>> > .include "${PORTSDIR}/Mk/bsd.pure.mk"
>> > .endif
>> >
>> > In bsd.port.mk may a be better choice. Though Pure is not as popular
>> > as some languages like PHP or Python, but it does and it will have
>> > more ports than like Go. To include bsd.pure.mk under Mk/ can lower 2
>> > lines in ~20 ports (or I have to leave it under lang/pure's private
>> > directory).
>>
>> How many pure ports are there ATM?
>>
>> --
>> IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
>> "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
>> FreeBSD committer -> ite...@freebsd.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
>
>
>
>
> --
> Zhihao Yuan, nickname lichray
> The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
> ___
> 4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/
--
Zhihao Yuan, nickname lichray
The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
___
4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/
___
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"
Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk
I would like to hold off on any more disruptive changes to the tree until we can get this release out the door. If that means devel/clang needs to stay at its current value (and only clang-devel updated), then that's fine. mcl ___ 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"
Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Mark Linimon wrote: > I would like to hold off on any more disruptive changes to the tree > until we can get this release out the door. If that means devel/clang > needs to stay at its current value (and only clang-devel updated), then > that's fine. devel/clang always points to the release version, and its maintainer is contacting other maintainers who has ports depends on clang/llvm to fix the broken stuff. > > mcl -- Zhihao Yuan, nickname lichray The best way to predict the future is to invent it. ___ 4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/ ___ 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"
Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 01:28:33AM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > I would like to hold off on any more disruptive changes to the tree > until we can get this release out the door. If that means devel/clang > needs to stay at its current value (and only clang-devel updated), then > that's fine. We don't actually need to add a bsd.pure.mk to upgrade llvm. We would need to complete the repocopy in ports/163030 and change the build and run depends in lang/pure which would change the depends of the 12ish ports involved. Similar changes are needed in a couple other ports. I'll leave it up to portmgr to decide if that's too disruptive. IMO if any change of this scope (an upgrade triggering less than dozen rebuilds, mostly of ports that aren't widely used) should be approved, it should be this one given our general toolchain focus. -- Brooks pgpU7Cr8Ql124.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk
No, we don't need it that to upgrade llvm, but I need to decide soon. -- Zhihao Yuan On Dec 5, 2011 10:16 AM, "Brooks Davis" wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 01:28:33AM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > > I would like to hold off on any more disruptive changes to the tree > > until we can get this release out the door. If that means devel/clang > > needs to stay at its current value (and only clang-devel updated), then > > that's fine. > > We don't actually need to add a bsd.pure.mk to upgrade llvm. We would > need to complete the repocopy in ports/163030 and change the build and > run depends in lang/pure which would change the depends of the 12ish > ports involved. Similar changes are needed in a couple other ports. > > I'll leave it up to portmgr to decide if that's too disruptive. IMO if > any change of this scope (an upgrade triggering less than dozen rebuilds, > mostly of ports that aren't widely used) should be approved, it should > be this one given our general toolchain focus. > > -- Brooks > ___ 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"
Re: Plan to add a bsd.pure.mk
Brooks Davis píše v po 05. 12. 2011 v 10:15 -0600: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 01:28:33AM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > > I would like to hold off on any more disruptive changes to the tree > > until we can get this release out the door. If that means devel/clang > > needs to stay at its current value (and only clang-devel updated), then > > that's fine. > > We don't actually need to add a bsd.pure.mk to upgrade llvm. We would > need to complete the repocopy in ports/163030 and change the build and > run depends in lang/pure which would change the depends of the 12ish > ports involved. Similar changes are needed in a couple other ports. > > I'll leave it up to portmgr to decide if that's too disruptive. IMO if > any change of this scope (an upgrade triggering less than dozen rebuilds, > mostly of ports that aren't widely used) should be approved, it should > be this one given our general toolchain focus. Just put it under /usr/ports/lang/pure/bsd.pure.mk and be done with it. We can always move it to /usr/ports/Mk later. -- -- Pav Lucistnik God is real unless declared integer. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
