Re: Status of QNX support?

[Jonathan Perkin <jperkin%joyent.com@localhost>]

* On 2015-04-26 at 07:55 BST, Jan Danielsson wrote:

>    I'm working on a QNX (6.5.0, in case it's relevant) project, and
> thought I'd make use of pkgsrc to build some tools I frequently use.  I
> checked out pkgsrc from cvs and tried to bootstrap, but it failed.  I
> did a quick search to see if it's a known problem but instead I found
> that Foundry27 are hosting a "fork" of pkgsrc in a subversion
> repository.  I was a little surprised to find that they have subtrees
> for different QNX distro versions (.../pkgsrc/HEAD_650 is for QNX 6.5.0,
> etc).
> 
>    I checked out the subversion repository and sure enough, I could
> bootstrap.  However, the whole repository seems a litte old-ish.
> 
>    I assume there are good reasons for keeping separate branches for
> each new QNX-release, though it raises a few questions:
> 
>    - Are Foundry27 changes pushed upstream to central pkgsrc CVS?  If
> so, for which svn branch?  Is the long-term goal to support "all"
> versions of QNX in central pkgsrc?
>    - If I encounter pkgsrc problems which are specific to QNX, do I
> report them to "central" (TNF) pkgsrc, or do I report it to the devs on
> Foundry27?

There shouldn't be any need to have separate branches for each
release, pkgsrc has good abstractions to support 23 operating systems
from a single tree, and if we're missing some we'll gladly add them.

I'd love to see the QNX stuff in the main tree, if anyone can help out
with that it'd be great.  If QNX doesn't work then it's a bug in our
pkgsrc, regardless if there happen to be patches somewhere on the
internet which fix it.

The only time it makes sense to have a separate fork is for something
like Joyent's multiarch support, which is a large and intrusive change
that most people won't need/want.

-- 
Jonathan Perkin  -  Joyent, Inc.  -  www.joyent.com