Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Avoid unnecessarily overwriting Makefile variables #33

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

slicer69
Copy link

The Makefile in its original form sets certain variables, like PREFIX, in a way which will override the user's (or build environment's) existing settings. Switching the "=" to the "?=" symbol allows the host environment to set things like the compiler and PREFIX automatically, without needing to patch the Makefile.

This will make porting to other platforms like FreeBSD easier.

The Makefile in its original form sets certain variables, like PREFIX, in a way which will override the user's (or build environment's) existing settings. Switching the "=" to the "?=" symbol allows the host environment to set things like the compiler and PREFIX automatically, without needing to patch the Makefile.

This will make porting to other platforms like FreeBSD easier.
@leahneukirchen
Copy link
Owner

Duplicate of #20, also see #20 (comment)

@eli-schwartz
Copy link

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=253086#c7

The author of this PR is trying to update FreeBSD's port (from 2017) of nq to a personal fork. Classified as a "new" port.

When pointed out that there is already that very port, slicer69 responded:

That is really weird. I did a search for nq on FreshPorts the other day before I started work on the port and got no results. Guess it's already ported.

Which seems... unlikely.

I would be very concerned about the rest of the comment:

The reason I forked upstream is the maintainer doesn't seem to have done any work on nq in the past four years and has rejected any porting/documentation pull requests. It's less about getting the new Makefile in place and just gaining a chance to keep working on it.

Bottom line is I plan to continue the source fork whether it's useful for the FreeBSD port or not, so we might as well use it.

So apparently now rejecting env FOO=bar make as equivalent to make FOO=bar constitutes "has rejected any porting/documentation pull requests" and you now have a hostile fork trying to push its way into FreeBSD.

(It has not been 4 years, it seems to have been 3 years of no one having bug reports to fix...)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants