Re: Setlist maintenance

[Mindaugas Rasiukevicius <rmind%netbsd.org@localhost>]

Alistair Crooks <agc%pkgsrc.org@localhost> wrote:
> Our static setlists enable us to cross-build easily on other
> platforms, but can sometimes be a double-edged sword - they are
> difficult to maintain, can be unintuitive in what has to be added, and
> can be prone to problems with definitions and duplication in other
> sets.  I doubt anyone has properly managed the syspkg names in ages,
> if at all.
> 
> We've also seen another instance lately where the compat libs raise
> other problems for everybody's education.
> 
> Some time ago I wrote a utility that is designed to be added to the
> *.mk infrastructure, which uses the Makefile definitions to produce
> output for what the set lists should look like.
> 
> I've put a tar file of the gensetlist utility at:
> 
>       http://www.netbsd.org/~agc/gensetlist-20101031.tar.gz
> 
> I'm not proposing it be added to NetBSD, merely hoping that its
> presence could make set list maintenance easier.
> 
> <...>

Is there a reason why this was not merged?  Also, any particular reason
why we could not always auto-generate sets?

-- 
Mindaugas