Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

Convert bsd.sdl.mk into Uses/sdl.mk
ClosedPublic

Authored by AMDmi3 on Feb 4 2019, 3:47 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Fri, Dec 6, 1:28 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 30 2024, 12:48 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 30 2024, 12:48 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 30 2024, 12:48 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 30 2024, 12:48 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 30 2024, 12:48 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 30 2024, 12:35 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 24 2024, 11:20 AM
Subscribers

Details

Reviewers
None
Group Reviewers
portmgr
O5: Ports Framework(Owns No Changed Paths)
Commits
rP492696: Convert bsd.sdl.mk to Uses/sdl.mk
Summary
  • Convert bsd.sdl.mk into Uses feature
  • Simplify code a bit
Test Plan

Exp-run is needed

Diff Detail

Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Tests Skipped

Event Timeline

mat added inline comments.
Mk/Uses/sdl.mk
79

It would probably be a better idea to change this to a DEV_ERROR, and to move it in Mk/bsd.sanity.mk, and to patch the dozen ports or so that use USE_SDL=yes or opt_USE= sdl=yes.

Mk/bsd.port.mk
1426–1429

I was going to suggest fixing those ports too, but there are quite a few.

Mk/Uses/sdl.mk
79

Agreed, already working on this.

Mk/bsd.port.mk
1426–1429

Yep, I'd prefer to convert ports gradually like it's done for USE_GNOME and USE_GL. Number of USE_SDL ports is comparable to USE_GL ports.

Mk/bsd.port.mk
1426–1429

Well, thing is, having it done gradually is not the nice thing to do, because you end up doing half the job and asking the other ports to finish it :-)

Technically, the way it was done for USE_GNOME or USE_GL was ok, but it was humanly wrong.

AMDmi3 edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)

Remove support for USE_SDL=yes (all ports using USE_SDL=yes were fixed)

Could you replace all the tests doing:

.if ${foo:Mbar} != ""

with a much simpler:

.if ${foo:Mbar}

and the:

.if ${foo:Mbar} == ""

with:

.if empty(foo:Mbar)

The time when our make required these constructions is long gone.

Modernize make constructs

This look ok to me. Feel free to ask for an exp-run.

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state Needs Review.Feb 11 2019, 3:21 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

@mat sorry, I though you've marked this as accepted. Exp-run was OK anyway: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235561