Changeset View
Standalone View
graphics/drm-kmod/Makefile
| Property | Old Value | New Value |
|---|---|---|
| svn:eol-style | null | native \ No newline at end of property |
| svn:keywords | null | FreeBSD=%H \ No newline at end of property |
| svn:mime-type | null | text/plain \ No newline at end of property |
| # Created by: Johannes Dieterich <jmd@FreeBSD.org> | |||||
| # $FreeBSD$ | |||||
| PORTNAME= drm-kmod | |||||
| PORTVERSION= g20180930 | |||||
| CATEGORIES= graphics | |||||
| MAINTAINER= jmd@FreeBSD.org | |||||
| COMMENT= Metaport of DRM modules for the linuxkpi-based KMS components | |||||
| USES= metaport | |||||
| .include <bsd.port.options.mk> | |||||
| .if ${OPSYS} != FreeBSD | |||||
imp: This needs some why:
#
# Install the newest drm port the kernel will support. We generally… | |||||
Done Inline ActionsThe numbers here should be hash signs that the reviewboard markup starts numbering with.. imp: The numbers here should be hash signs that the reviewboard markup starts numbering with..
| |||||
Done Inline ActionsAdded language to the description that hopefully encompasses this. jmd: Added language to the description that hopefully encompasses this. | |||||
| IGNORE= not supported on anything but FreeBSD (missing linuxkpi functionality) | |||||
Done Inline ActionsI'd lose the OPSYS check here and have the check from below moved to the top and make this rather long ifs the 'else' part of it. imp: I'd lose the OPSYS check here and have the check from below moved to the top and make this… | |||||
| .else | |||||
| .if ${OPSYS} == "FreeBSD" && ${ARCH} != "amd64" | |||||
| .if ${OSVERSION} >= 1200080 | |||||
| RUN_DEPENDS= ${KMODDIR}/drm.ko:graphics/drm-legacy-kmod | |||||
| .elif ${OSVERSION} < 1200080 | |||||
| IGNORE= legacy kmod not supported on less than 12.0 | |||||
| .endif | |||||
| .elif ${OPSYS} == "FreeBSD" && ${ARCH} == "amd64" | |||||
Done Inline ActionsFreeBSD 11.1 will be EOL tomorrow (2018-10-01), perhaps we want to raise the minimum version to 11.2? On the other hand, people are probably still using 11.1 rene: FreeBSD 11.1 will be EOL tomorrow (2018-10-01), perhaps we want to raise the minimum version to… | |||||
Done Inline ActionsI'd assume there'll be a few people still running on 11.1 and it doesn't hurt to have it? jmd: I'd assume there'll be a few people still running on 11.1 and it doesn't hurt to have it? | |||||
| .if ${OSVERSION} < 1101510 | |||||
| IGNORE= not supported on 11.1 or older, no kernel support | |||||
| .elif ${OSVERSION} >= 1101510 && ${OSVERSION} < 1200000 | |||||
| RUN_DEPENDS= ${KMODDIR}/drm.ko:graphics/drm-stable-kmod | |||||
| .elif ${OSVERSION} >= 1200000 && ${OSVERSION} < 1200045 | |||||
| IGNORE= not supported on older 12, no kernel support | |||||
| .elif ${OSVERSION} >= 1200045 && ${OSVERSION} < 1200058 | |||||
| RUN_DEPENDS= ${KMODDIR}/drm.ko:graphics/drm-stable-kmod | |||||
Done Inline ActionsWhy drm-next here? I thought the messaging was drm-stable-kmod everywhere. It's the module I just installed for the nuc running 12.0ALPHA7. It's 1200084. imp: Why drm-next here? I thought the messaging was drm-stable-kmod everywhere. It's the module I… | |||||
Done Inline ActionsNo, that's not the message - as you can see from the config here. The metaport is trying to embody our recommendations to avoid needing to support all possible enumerations (and also clear up the messaging that clearly wasn't ideal). If you want to run an old DRM and it supports your HW and FreeBSD version you can obviously still do that but realistically the work on the actual DRM bits and KPI parts is happening in the later versions so having everybody on "stable" (yeah, we also plan to change these names eventually) is unrealistic, especially if breaking changes get introduced into CURRENT. jmd: No, that's not the message - as you can see from the config here. The metaport is trying to… | |||||
Not Done Inline ActionsIt's not the message articulated to me before I added the drm abandonware messages is my point. My bigger point is that the message needs clarity as this port is at odds with what I thought the canonical message was. It's fine if I'm confused and we need a different message than I understood: I just want to make sure that the message is crystal clear, well documented and generally the consensus view so everybody can articulate it and we can enshrine it in docs for as long as it's relevant. imp: It's not the message articulated to me before I added the drm abandonware messages is my point. | |||||
| .elif ${OSVERSION} >= 1200058 && ${OSVERSION} < 1300000 | |||||
Done Inline ActionsI'd make this 1300000 instead. imp: I'd make this 1300000 instead. | |||||
Done Inline ActionsFair enough. jmd: Fair enough. | |||||
| RUN_DEPENDS= ${KMODDIR}/drm.ko:graphics/drm-next-kmod | |||||
Done Inline Actionsand why drm-devel-kmod here? imp: and why drm-devel-kmod here?
| |||||
| .elif ${OSVERSION} >= 1300000 | |||||
Done Inline ActionsI'd be inclined to have a .else IGNORE=Go away here :) imp: I'd be inclined to have a .else IGNORE=Go away here :) | |||||
Done Inline ActionsUsed slightly more polite language ;-) jmd: Used slightly more polite language ;-) | |||||
| RUN_DEPENDS= ${KMODDIR}/drm.ko:graphics/drm-devel-kmod | |||||
| .else | |||||
| IGNORE= not supported for this configuration | |||||
Done Inline ActionsI'd move this to the top... imp: I'd move this to the top... | |||||
| .endif | |||||
| .endif | |||||
| .endif | |||||
| .include <bsd.port.mk> | |||||
This needs some why:
Normally I wouldn't bother, but there's much confusion here and a little extra documentation wouldn't be a burden. And if people have drm-stable installed now and go to install this, they will understand why drm-next gets installed instead...