On 20/01/2012 12:53, Chris Rees wrote: > On 20 Jan 2012 10:20, "Matthew Seaman" <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> On 20/01/2012 09:18, Chris Rees wrote: >>> On 19 Jan 2012 08:58, "Matthew Seaman" <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >> >>>> On 19/01/2012 01:31, Michael Scheidell wrote: >> >>>>> anyway, worth the cycles? >>>>> take out -.include <bsd.port.pre.mk>; -.if ${ARCH} == "sparc64" >>>>> -BROKEN= Does not install on sparc64 >>>>> -.endif >>>>> and replace it with NOT_FOR_ARCHS= sparc64 ? >> >>>> I'd say worth it to standardize on NOT_FOR_ARCHS / ONLY_FOR_ARCHS to >>>> handle this sort of thing. By my calculations there are 28 ports that >>>> set 'BROKEN' because of architecture incompatibility on my amd64 >>>> system[*], whereas there are 904 ports that set either ONLY_FOR_ARCHS > or >>>> NOT_FOR_ARCHS. >> >>> No, it's not worth it :) >>> >>> This means we won't be able to differentiate between BROKEN and IGNORE. >> >> Not even if people make use of the {NOT,ONLY}_FOR_ARCHS_REASON or >> {NOT,ONLY}_FOR_ARCHS_REASON_${ARCH} variables? >> >> Actually I take your point, that it should be possible to distinguish >> between ports that permanently won't work on some architectures by >> design, and ports that temporarily don't work because of mistakes or >> broken dependencies or so forth, and that are expected to be fixed >> sooner rather than later. Unfortunately those two cases are already >> pretty confused. For instance (arbitrarily picking out a few grep hits): >> >> ./audio/amarok-kde4/Makefile:NOT_FOR_ARCHS_REASON_sparc64= > "GCC-related >> build error" >> ./audio/openal/Makefile:NOT_FOR_ARCHS_REASON_ia64= does not compile >> ./biology/migrate/Makefile:ONLY_FOR_ARCHS_REASON= Does not compile >> >> Where 'does not compile' or 'fails to install' are similarly the most >> popular reasons given for arch-related brokenness using the BROKEN >> variable. Given the banal and uninformative nature of such reasons, >> there's no easy way to tell if this is a temporary condition or not. >> >> Hmm... Perhaps if there was a BROKEN_FOR_ARCH{,_REASON{,${ARCH}}} set of >> variables documented alongside the other ..FOR_ARCH variables? > > Occasionally someone runs an exp- for sparc64 (lol) etc. > > They use TRYBROKEN to test packages marked BROKEN, but ONLY_FOR_ARCHS sets > IGNORE. > > Ports marked this way (incorrectly) will never be tested, and thus never > marked fixed. >
Yes, I understand thae distinction between BROKEN and IGNORE, thank you
very much. So the BROKEN_FOR_ARCH variable family should ultimately set
BROKEN rather than IGNORE. Obviously.
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
JID: [email protected] Kent, CT11 9PW
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
