On Freitag, 10. Juni 2011 at 20:25, Stefan Schaeckeler wrote: > > > What about software that just doesn't work on all platforms, because > > it needs to be ported? But maybe just works on some platforms? > > That should be explictly set with ONLY_FOR_PLATFORMS=..... > > > On the other hand, in very many instances software that has probably > > not been tested on DFly by the maintainers worked out of the box. > > ... because Dragonfly is very close to NetBSD? Maybe … but mostly because most of the software is pretty portable to begin with. What I fear is that many packages will be either out of date or ONLY_FOR_PLATFORMS=netbsd as soon as a serious problem with some platform comes up … and then having to remove that line by default to see if it maybe works for my platform nonetheless wouldn't help at all. The problem is that there's a large grey zone of maybe-it-works in between the known-good and known-bad platforms for any given package. Minimizing that grey zone is a great goal, and giving committers/submitters the tools for that would help a long way; requiring them to do so would IMHO discourage contribution too much. > > > > > > How about setting up a build farm of various plattforms > > > > that would be cool! > > That would make a great Google Summer of Code project :)I suppose it's less a > programming and more a hosting/hardware problem. Also: concept work. Who gets > access? How can they test a patch *without* committing it to the main tree? > what if testing a patch requires actually using the program, not just > building? -m.