[RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-02 Thread Junio C Hamano
I would appreciate if somebody with more familiarlity with the platform can suggest a better alternative than applying the following patch to our Makefile. Right now I have an equivalent of this change in config.mak locally when building on the said platform. The "2.7" bit certainly looks fishy,

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-02 Thread Greg Troxel
Junio C Hamano writes: > [query about NetBSD-6] > The "2.7" bit certainly looks fishy, as users should be able to > choose between "2.6" and "2.7" (and possibly "3.0"), IIUC. > > + PYTHON_PATH = /usr/pkg/bin/python2.7 > + PERL_PATH = /usr/pkg/bin/perl (I am one of the people who maint

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-02 Thread Greg Troxel
Junio C Hamano writes: > I would appreciate if somebody with more familiarlity with the > platform can suggest a better alternative than applying the > following patch to our Makefile. Right now I have an equivalent of > this change in config.mak locally when building on the said > platform. I

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-02 Thread Junio C Hamano
Greg Troxel writes: > I realize a README.foo file for N different systems could be clutter, > but having these checked in would provide the concise help that people > on any of those platforms need. Our Makefile documents knobs people on various platforms can tweak (PYTHON_PATH and OLD_ICONV are

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-03 Thread Greg Troxel
Junio C Hamano writes: > Greg Troxel writes: > >> I realize a README.foo file for N different systems could be clutter, >> but having these checked in would provide the concise help that people >> on any of those platforms need. > > Our Makefile documents knobs people on various platforms can t

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-03 Thread Junio C Hamano
Greg Troxel writes: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> Greg Troxel writes: >> >>> I realize a README.foo file for N different systems could be clutter, >>> but having these checked in would provide the concise help that people >>> on any of those platforms need. >> >> Our Makefile documents knobs pe

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-03 Thread Greg Troxel
Junio C Hamano writes: > I forgot to mention that we also ship configure (and keep track of > configure.ac) so that optionally people can let autoconf machinery > to create config.mak.autogen to be included at the same place as > handcrafted config.mak in their build process. I do not offhand >

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-03 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 01/03/2013 07:27 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> I forgot to mention that we also ship configure (and keep track of >> configure.ac) so that optionally people can let autoconf machinery >> to create config.mak.autogen to be included at the same place as >> handcrafted c

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-08 Thread Greg Troxel
Junio C Hamano writes: >> [OLD_ICONV] > It refers to the type of the second parameter to iconv(); OLD_ICONV > makes it take "const char *", as opposed to "char *", the latter of > which matches > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/iconv.html I just wanted to follow

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-08 Thread Junio C Hamano
Greg Troxel writes: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >>> [OLD_ICONV] > >> It refers to the type of the second parameter to iconv(); OLD_ICONV >> makes it take "const char *", as opposed to "char *", the latter of >> which matches >> >> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/iconv

Re: [RFH] NetBSD 6?

2013-01-08 Thread Greg Troxel
Junio C Hamano writes: > Don't get too offended by the "OLD_" prefix to that symbol, by the > way. I do not think "old" means "old and broken hence fixed in > newer version and you are low life if you live on a platform that > has to define it" ;-). Thanks - it did throw me at the beginning, b