Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/x11/qt4-libs

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> writes:

> Frédéric Fauberteau <triaxx%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:
>
>> diff -r1.56 Makefile.common
>> 22c22,24
>> < BROKEN_ON_PLATFORM=   Darwin-*-aarch64
>> ---
>>> .if ${OPSYS_VERSION} >= 130000
>>> NOT_FOR_PLATFORM+=    Darwin-*-*
>>> .endif
>
> I don't agree with NOT_FOR.  I don't see any fundamental reason why qt4
> could not be made to work, using some interfaces.  The fact that the
> platform withdrew an interface that was used previously is not enough.
> NetBSD doesn't have those interfaces, and qt4 works.  What's really
> going on is that qt4 is not maintained and thus hasn't adapted, and
> won't.  I bet qt5 and qt6 either work or will be made to work.
>
> NOT_FOR_PLATFORM is supposed to be about things where it fundamentally
> does not make sense, and there I would expect ONLY_FOR_PLATFORM much
> more often, to limit to FooOS when the program is "utility to manipulate
> the bar interface which is only present on FooOS".
>
> But if it is only troubled on >= 13, then indeed limiting to that is good.

Also: You seem to have a desire for NOT_FOR rather than BROKEN_ON.
Functionally, these do the same thing.  Why do you think it's important
to move to NOT_FOR vs BROKEN_ON?  (I have explained why I think
BROKEN_ON is correct.)