RFC: cleanup of linux ports

[Alexander Leidinger]

Mark Linimon <linimon at lonesome.com> wrote:

> It got changed not to be a pure trigger variable in 1.505, when the

Yes, it's my mega-patch. I refered to it in my answer.

> acceptable value '7' was added.  Now we have the worst of both worlds.
> If it can have multiple values then we have to test for illegal values
> and reject them via IGNORE.  Implicit in this is going and fixing the
> two current cases where the value is not 'yes'.  Otherwise IMHO this is
> completely fragile.  Again, consider what happens when someone sets
> 'USE_LINUX=rh-7' which they might reasonably expect to do since they
> can set it to 'rh-9'.  It should fail, not silently give them RH 8.

"rh-7" isn't allowed as per the documentation of USE_LINUX.

> As well, I see this fragility as an opportunity to shoot ourselves in
> the foot when changing default versions in the future.

I see your point, but I think porters should be clever enough to know that
they have to read the documentation. And the documentation explicitely says
that the value has to match emulators/linux_base-<value>.

Since you're insisting on this functionality I will implement your suggestion
(I assume you don't mind if I use "Requested by: portmgr (linimon)" in the
commit)... maybe tomorrow.

Because this change will need a fix to some ports too, I will add my complete
patchset to the PR with the bsd.port.mk changes for extended testing on the
cluster.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
http://www.Leidinger.net  Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org     netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137
microReid /mi:'kroh-reed/ n.

See microLenat.