On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 06:46:05PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote: > > > > Untill we resolve this, please take into consideration to avoid filing > > patches > > that use "netbsd-i386" in a way that breaks the other port. I've been > > careful > > to keep such incompatible patches without submitting, since I started. > > A bit late for that, I'm afraid; they're already fairly pervasive, > particularly throughout the toolchain.
I know that. But I'm not asking you to revert the existing incompatible changes, I understand it wouldn't make sense to do that. I just ask to not add more of them. > Except in the case of things like libc. Which tend to pop up more than one > might imagine. Unfortunately, it's also true that quite a few maintainers > already have ARCH logic, and are not entirely amenable to just randomly up > and changing this because we can't figure out what we want to do. You can handle libc dependencies portably I think, instead of: libc12-dev [netbsd-i386] | libc1-dev [freebsd-i386] Just do: libc6-dev | libc-dev -- Robert Millan "[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work." -- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)
