ports/92334: Review of FreeBSD Port of Tcl

[Donal Fellows]

>Number:         92334
>Category:       ports
>Synopsis:       Review of FreeBSD Port of Tcl
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    freebsd-ports-bugs
>State:          open
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:
>Class:          update
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Wed Jan 25 23:40:03 GMT 2006
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     Donal Fellows
>Release:        Not relevant/applicable
>Organization:
University of Manchester /  Tcl Core Team
>Environment:
Not relevant/applicable
>Description:
I have been reviewing the patches to Tcl source files as part of the port of Tcl to FreeBSD (looking at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/lang/tcl84/files/) and I have some feedback.

 * patch-tclUnixChan.c - it is not really clear what this patch is attempting to do, but it is definitely not doing what its check in comment seems to indicate is attempted. FWIW, Tcl configures all FDs that satisfy the isatty() call as serial channels *except* stdin/stdout/stderr and explicitly /dev/tty (NB not /dev/ttya or anything else that has /dev/tty as a prefix; just the literal). My guess is that this patch can be dropped with no ill effect at all, given that asking around indicates that you don't have a device called "/dev/cua" (/dev/cuaa0 etc. not counting given the logic of that patch).

 * patch-tclUnixInit.c - this patch has been accepted into the Tcl core; it will form part of Tcl 8.4.11

 * patch-tclUnixSock.c - this patch seems to indicate that a better configure test for uname() is necessary, though I don't know what to do exactly there. In any case, I suspect that this patch is fixing things in the wrong place.

 * patch-aa,patch-configure - I've not reviewed these (they're for files that we pretty much expect vendors to adapt anyway)
>How-To-Repeat:
N/A
>Fix:

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: