Mario Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (09/03/2007): > First of all, thanks for the feedback.
You're welcome, thanks for your responsiveness! > With the next upstream release of BRLTTY (hopefully 3.8) I will then > do the remaining changes to the packaging. Let me ask you some > specific questions: If it's not going to be fixed right now but planned for a later release, maybe you could add the 'confirmed' tag so that other porters don't loose time when browsing kfreebsd bugs to ping bugs opened for a while. (Of course once you have no more question to ask. ;-)) > > * brltty_Programs_Makefile.in-kfreebsd.diff: > > As far as I understand it, it is sufficient to copy > > sys_freebsd.c and usb_freebsd.c to respectively sys_kfreebsd.c > > and usb_kfreebsd.c (in Programs), and to add them in this > > Makefile.in to allow the build on GNU/kFreeBSD. I know that I > > might use 'freebsd' instead of 'kfreebsd' in the configure.in > > file, but these files might need adjustments in the future, and > > might differ from the plain FreeBSD ones. > > As I understand it, the kFreeBSD project uses a more or less > unmodified FreeBSD kernel with a different user-space. What exactly > do you expect that we'd have to modify in *_kfreebsd.c? Since these > files in BRLTTY define the layer into different kernels, I kind of > wonder if we really want to copy these files. First of all, you have to know that I'm not a "confirmed" GNU/kFreeBSD porter (see on [1], I'm quite new), so I don't have exactly in mind the differences between what I call the "plain" FreeBSD kernel and "our" kFreeBSD one. Given your feedback, it sounds to me that it would be sensible to use directly *_freebsd.c and to only make a distinction between *_kfreebsd.c and *_freebsd.c if some error occurs (in which case one could think of adapting *_freebsd.c accordingly, so that no copy is needed at all). 1. (heavy page) http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=kfreebsd;[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois
pgpHtroIgQS8h.pgp
Description: PGP signature
