svn commit: r286995 - head/share/mk

[Bryan Drewery]

On 9/22/2015 11:25 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 10:07:33PM -0700, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>> On 8/21/15 8:15 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
>>> Author: imp
>>> Date: Fri Aug 21 15:15:22 2015
>>> New Revision: 286995
>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/286995
>>>
>>> Log:
>>>   Document bsd.progs.mk, including its status as being strongly
>>>   discouraged and that it will be going away as soon as is practicable.
>>>
>>> Modified:
>>>   head/share/mk/bsd.README
>>
>> I find this functionality irreplaceable for simplicity. The alternative
>> is more Makefiles for simple extra progs. Granted it has meta mode
>> dirdeps issues but I think that is acceptable as there are other ways to
>> address that.
>>
>> Where is this deprecation coming from? Is it just due to bapt's
>> in-progress (but not working) patch at https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3444
>> to remove bsd.progs.mk in place of PROGS in bsd.prog.mk?
>>
>> I would like to document PROGS properly. I had no idea how it worked
>> until reading over it tonight. If the plan wasn't to remove PROGS itself
>> I will do so.
>>
> This is the exact opposite.
> 
> the review comes from the fact that bsd.progs.mk is broken.and has not be fixed
> for a while. The brokenness comes from the fact it is including magically
> bsd.prog.mk multiple times, the easiy to see brokenness is the fact that
> everything defining FILES/SCRIPTS and other magic macros that bsd.prog.mk accept
> via it multiple inputs will be reinstalled multiple times, one can fix those by
> exhaustively adding overwrites of every single macros, but hat would be really
> tedious each time one of the thing included in bsd.prog.mk get modified or added
> 

I have fixed this actually. I am committing today.

> You can easily see that for all the bsd.tests.mk.
> 
> While I do really like the fonctionnality it is very complicticated to get it
> working.
> 
> My work in progress version is eaily fixable by adding:
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2003-June/000906.html
> 
> And extending the above for LDFLAGS and CXXFLAGS.
> 
> Which had been rejected in the past multiple times :(
> 
> The subject came back again
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2010-September/010613.html
> 
> I think D3444 would be a good excuse to bring back the idea of perfiles specific
> FLAGS. But I didn't want to wake up dead subject noone agreed on.
> 
> Best regards,
> Bapt
> 


-- 
Regards,
Bryan Drewery

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/attachments/20150923/b7b362bb/attachment.bin>