On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:50AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote: > At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports > build with CLANG or not because they're not forced to.
I think this is a mis-representation. Adding the requirement "your ports must work on clang" is adding an ex-post-facto requirement. This creates the following matrix of what we are implicitly asking maintainers to do: (FreeBSD 7|8|9|10) * (amd64|arm|i386|powerpc|sparc64) * (base gcc|base clang) It is completely insane to expect anyone to be able to test in all of those environments, or even a tiny subset of them. This isn't what most people sign up for when they sign up to maintain ports. > Those who don't run CURRENT won't notice, but those who do will have to > get their butts up and fix the ports I think it's foolish to assume that maintainres don't have their butts in gear as it is. Please note, we have nearly 1300 PRs, hundreds of ports with build errors and/or PRs, and hundreds that fail on -current only. I try to advertise all these things the best I know how. Adding the hundreds that fail on -clang only and then blaming the maintainers is simply going to be counter-productive. mcl _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
