On 2023/08/18 10:07:47 +0200, Theo Buehler <t...@theobuehler.org> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 09:38:54AM +0200, Omar Polo wrote: > > On 2023/08/17 20:23:48 +0200, Theo Buehler <t...@theobuehler.org> wrote: > > > If I wanted to document them, I would grep the ports tree and see which > > > ones are used most. Then send small diffs to document a group of those > > > that belongs together. > > I may have stripped too much context... I was responding to the long > list that ashlen provided.
I stripped too much context, my fault. I only quickly skimmed through the thread, the change of subject is what caught my attention > > > > > > > +.It MODCARGO_WANTLIB > > > > +Needed Rust libraries, for use with WANTLIB. > > > > > > I don't think it hurts to be a bit more explicit here. The reason is > > > that using an explicit entry for c++abi means that WANTLIB are wrong for > > > sparc64. > > > > > > So I'd do something like this. > > > > fwiw I'd like for this to be added. I knew about MODCARGO_WANTLIB due > > to reading the list, should be documented. > > alright. > > > not an issue with the diff itself since no item has it, but should we > > amend the list to use Ev to mark up the variables? i.e. > > > > +.It Ev MODCARGO_WANTLIB > > I was going to do that as a follow-up. Feel free to do that now and I'll > adjust my diff before landing it. don't want to cause unnecessary conflicts. good to know you already had it on your list! sorry for the noise,
