Re: Rebuilding firefore

[Rob Whitlock <rwhitlock22%gmail.com@localhost>]

> On Apr 5, 2025, at 2:48 AM, Thomas Klausner <wiz%gatalith.at@localhost> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 08:58:54PM -0400, Rob Whitlock wrote:
>> Is there a rationale for deciding which of BROKEN or PKG_FAIL_REASON
>> to use in this situation?
> 
> I think PKG_FAIL_REASON is the "backend" - it can be set for various
> reasons - and BROKEN is the "frontend" used for explicitly setting
> packages as broken in their package Makefiles.
> Thomas

The pkgsrc guide recommends setting it in certain situations

  If the package should be skipped (for example, because it
  provides functionality already provided by the system),
  set PKG_SKIP_REASON to a descriptive message. If the
  package should fail because some preconditions are not
  met, set PKG_FAIL_REASON to a descriptive message.

https://www.netbsd.org/docs/pkgsrc/fixes.html#not-building-packages

so I'm thinking maybe your explanation isn't entirely correct, or the
pkgsrc guide isn't correct.