Subject: Re: creeping protocol defines
To: Sean Doran <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: None <email@example.com>
Date: 04/14/2000 22:42:38
>Why? You could define them conditionally, and allow an
>explicit "disable define of -DINET6" by simply looking for
>USE_INET6, as done in pkgsrc.
>That is, use USE_INET6, and assume that if it's not "no",
>then the user wants -DINET6.
as documented in pkgsrc/mk/mk.conf.example (may be it wasn't clear
enough), USE_INET6 is not to be tweaked by users. it basically shows
if the platforms has IPv6 ready userland or not. sometimes you
go into trouble if you mix IPv4-only userland with IPv6 kernel with,
or whatever. it is much safer to obey whatever bsd.prefs.mk defines.
this goes the same for non-pkgsrc userland. we do have -DINET6
in some cases, however, I think I do not really expect them to be
turned off. conditional compilation also impose maintenance cost
(with n options we have 2^n combinations).
>This doesn't affect all that many files, afaict, as below.
it looks many to me. at least, I strongly object to conditionalize
library builds, there'll be too much mess. also distrib/sets/lists
will become a headache, if we were to support binary distribution
without IPv6 (I really hope this does not happen).
>P.S.: I would say that -DIPSEC and -DNETISO should also be conditionalized.
I think we already have enough options to play with (KERBEROS,
KERBEROS5, BUILD_POSTFIX - it is not documented in bsd.README BTW,
SKEY, crypto things).
with 3 more switches, we will get 8 times more combinations.
could you please volunteer to take care of 7/8 of all possible
>P.S.S.: I am also willing to accept a "go soak your head, IPv6-Hater" answer.
I don't say that. footprint matters sometimes.
if many feels it necessary to add conditional, I can do that, with
in bsd.own.mk (on by default), just like SKEY.
but I really need someone who takes care of non-IPv6 build and
send detailed bug reports.