UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

Alexey Suslikov
Mostly cleanup update:
* remove dead HOMEPAGE
* MASTER_SITES changed
* new distinfo
* PFRAG.shared -> PLIST

netbsd-iscsi-target.diff (3K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

David Coppa
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Suslikov
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Mostly cleanup update:
> * remove dead HOMEPAGE
> * MASTER_SITES changed
> * new distinfo
> * PFRAG.shared -> PLIST

ok dcoppa@ for the dev who wants to do the commit

ciao,
David

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

Roman Kravchuk
In reply to this post by Alexey Suslikov
Tested on current amd64.

ok MAINTAINER


2013/5/17 Alexey Suslikov <[hidden email]>

> Mostly cleanup update:
> * remove dead HOMEPAGE
> * MASTER_SITES changed
> * new distinfo
> * PFRAG.shared -> PLIST
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

Kirill Bychkov-2
In reply to this post by David Coppa
On Fri, May 17, 2013 14:02, David Coppa wrote:

> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Suslikov
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Mostly cleanup update:
>> * remove dead HOMEPAGE
>> * MASTER_SITES changed
>> * new distinfo
>> * PFRAG.shared -> PLIST
>
> ok dcoppa@ for the dev who wants to do the commit
>
> ciao,
> David
>
>
Is it OK to merge PFRAG into PLIST when it's not SHARED_ONLY port and it have
.a an .la libs?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

Alexey Suslikov
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Kirill Bychkov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, May 17, 2013 14:02, David Coppa wrote:
>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Suslikov
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Mostly cleanup update:
>>> * remove dead HOMEPAGE
>>> * MASTER_SITES changed
>>> * new distinfo
>>> * PFRAG.shared -> PLIST
>>
>> ok dcoppa@ for the dev who wants to do the commit
>>
>> ciao,
>> David
>>
>>
> Is it OK to merge PFRAG into PLIST when it's not SHARED_ONLY port and it have
> .a an .la libs?

.a and .la are for static linking, no?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

Stuart Henderson-6
In reply to this post by Kirill Bychkov-2
On 2013/05/17 14:30, Kirill Bychkov wrote:

> On Fri, May 17, 2013 14:02, David Coppa wrote:
> > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Suslikov
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> Mostly cleanup update:
> >> * remove dead HOMEPAGE
> >> * MASTER_SITES changed
> >> * new distinfo
> >> * PFRAG.shared -> PLIST
> >
> > ok dcoppa@ for the dev who wants to do the commit
> >
> > ciao,
> > David
> >
> >
> Is it OK to merge PFRAG into PLIST when it's not SHARED_ONLY port and it have
> .a an .la libs?
>

yes, there is special support for this now.

what you have to watch out for, is ports like gettext, where there is
a library that is only present as .so, with no .a lib.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

Kirill Bychkov-2
In reply to this post by Alexey Suslikov
On Fri, May 17, 2013 15:25, Alexey Suslikov wrote:

> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Kirill Bychkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 14:02, David Coppa wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Suslikov
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Mostly cleanup update:
>>>> * remove dead HOMEPAGE
>>>> * MASTER_SITES changed
>>>> * new distinfo
>>>> * PFRAG.shared -> PLIST
>>>
>>> ok dcoppa@ for the dev who wants to do the commit
>>>
>>> ciao,
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>> Is it OK to merge PFRAG into PLIST when it's not SHARED_ONLY port and it
>> have
>> .a an .la libs?
>
> .a and .la are for static linking, no?

Yes. And we still have static archs which can't create .so lib. So it's living
in PFRAG.shared and not built and installed on !shared archs.

>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

David Coppa
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Alexey Suslikov
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Kirill Bychkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 15:25, Alexey Suslikov wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Kirill Bychkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 14:02, David Coppa wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Suslikov
>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> Mostly cleanup update:
>>>>>> * remove dead HOMEPAGE
>>>>>> * MASTER_SITES changed
>>>>>> * new distinfo
>>>>>> * PFRAG.shared -> PLIST
>>>>>
>>>>> ok dcoppa@ for the dev who wants to do the commit
>>>>>
>>>>> ciao,
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Is it OK to merge PFRAG into PLIST when it's not SHARED_ONLY port and it
>>>> have
>>>> .a an .la libs?
>>>
>>> .a and .la are for static linking, no?
>>
>> Yes. And we still have static archs which can't create .so lib. So it's living
>> in PFRAG.shared and not built and installed on !shared archs.
>
> I see. Let's go without PLIST/PFRAG.shared chunks. Ok?

your update has been already committed by sthen@

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: net/netbsd-iscsi-target

Alexey Suslikov
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:57 PM, David Coppa <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Alexey Suslikov
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Kirill Bychkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 15:25, Alexey Suslikov wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Kirill Bychkov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 14:02, David Coppa wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Alexey Suslikov
>>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Mostly cleanup update:
>>>>>>> * remove dead HOMEPAGE
>>>>>>> * MASTER_SITES changed
>>>>>>> * new distinfo
>>>>>>> * PFRAG.shared -> PLIST
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ok dcoppa@ for the dev who wants to do the commit
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ciao,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Is it OK to merge PFRAG into PLIST when it's not SHARED_ONLY port and it
>>>>> have
>>>>> .a an .la libs?
>>>>
>>>> .a and .la are for static linking, no?
>>>
>>> Yes. And we still have static archs which can't create .so lib. So it's living
>>> in PFRAG.shared and not built and installed on !shared archs.
>>
>> I see. Let's go without PLIST/PFRAG.shared chunks. Ok?
>
> your update has been already committed by sthen@

to clarify on that "special support" sthen@ mentioned.

am I correctly understood, bsd.port.mk will not install .so on !shared
if .a/.la specified, right?