Re: Why adding unconditional dependency on tradcpp? (Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/net/tightvnc)

[David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:08:30PM +0900, OBATA Akio wrote:
 > > > And you must maintain tradcpp by yourself, because upstream developers
 > > > will not take care of missing features for a such local tool.
 > >
 > >As opposed to, say, the upstream developers who don't care about
 > >missing features in clang, which doesn't provide a traditional cpp at
 > >all?
 > 
 > If using tradcpp conditionally, not affect to gcc users.

Ok, so what broke again? Is there a problem here?

 > you will probably get the answer `why using such poor cpp?'.

You know, I didn't exactly spend a lot of time on it and I don't claim
it to be particularly special or anything, but I did write it and if
you persist in this line of argument you will eventually get me
annoyed...

 > >Anyhow, nobody upstream particularly maintains imake or anything that
 > >uses imake any more than they absolutely have to. If there's a
 > >problem, best to just rip it out entirely.
 > 
 > As already I said, "x11/libX11, x11/libXext, x11/libXt,...", I
 > cannot find that imake is used by them.

They use cpp on makefiles. Thirty seconds with "make SKIP_DEPENDS=yes
patch" in x11/libX11 showed me where and how. And also that I don't
want to touch it or argue with upstream about replacing it with
something sensible.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost