The purpose of the awk is to trim a single leading-tab from the input.

In D16132#498554, @hselasky wrote:

In pkg we have a SAT solver. Can you explain how your CMB compares to a SAT solver?

I've had time to reflect, and I sincerely apologize for my unreasonable reaction to a reasonable inquiry.

Remove PORTVERSION

Remove PORTVERSION

In D22681#496190, @jhb wrote:

Erm, there's this bit in bsd.port.Mk:

.if defined(DISTVERSION)
DEV_ERROR+=     "Defining both PORTVERSION and DISTVERSION is wrong, only set one, if necessary, set DISTNAME"
.endif

I suspect DEV_ERROR means it only errors if you have DEVELOPER=yes set in /etc/make.conf as the porter's handbook recommends (see the start of chapter 3 at https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/book.html). I ran into this error the other day myself when I had a bug in one of my ports (was including bsd.port.mk again after bsd.port.pre.mk).

So maybe before you blast someone with "please test before submitting reviews" maybe *you* should test

You know that field in Phabricator and arc that says "Test Plan"?

Remove extra newline

Remove extra newline as-per mat's instruction

Remove extra newline as-per mat

Remove extra newline as-per mat

Remove extra newline per-mat

Remove extra newline

Drop Makefile change from review (done by addport)

Drop Makefile change from review (done by addport)

Drop Makefile change from review (done by addport)

Drop Makefile change from review (done by addport)

Drop Makefile change from review (done by addport)

Update LICENSE in Makefile

In D22628#495001, @mat wrote:

That is only one line of code worth. What problem are you trying to solve?

Remove noninja args to USES=cmake

In D22628#495001, @mat wrote:

That is only one line of code worth. What problem are you trying to solve?

Overhaul [lib]cmb offerings to address previous feedback

Reclaim maintainership

makesum

Did you close because no longer relevant?

I've started to read the documentation and it looks like it's definitely worth plugging this math emulation layer into libcmb to see just how much performance gain is actually realized.

After thought, I support this change.

@rgrimes @cem If one of you approve, I'll go ahead and usher it in

I approve of this change. But since I have not committed in a while, want to get sign-off from at least one other person.

Try to get ahold of mw@ and loos@ to review

Thanks! I have a huge update coming this month that will bring in lots of changes. Hoping you could revisit just afterward.