Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 01:36:58 +0100 From: Matthew Rezny <rezny@freebsd.org> To: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@freebsd.org> Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, swills@freebsd.org, gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r435961 - in head/www/webkit-gtk2: . files Message-ID: <1651531.nGg9pBWiG5@workstation.reztek> In-Reply-To: <20170312001958.6e8fdd4b@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> References: <201703112115.v2BLF3qk062113@repo.freebsd.org> <20170312001958.6e8fdd4b@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 12 March 2017 00:19:58 Tijl Coosemans wrote: > On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 21:15:03 +0000 (UTC) Matthew Rezny > > <rezny@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > Author: rezny > > Date: Sat Mar 11 21:15:03 2017 > > New Revision: 435961 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/435961 > > > > Log: > > - Fix building on PPC/PPC64 [1] > > - Fix building on ARMv6 [2] > > - Add missing indirect dependencies > > You should never add the dependencies of another port to your port > because if that other port ever changes dependencies your port will still > pull them in. If you are getting warnings about missing dependencies and > you know they are indirect then you know there's a problem with one of > the other dependencies of your port. The problem needs to fixed there. > In this case it's probably because of gnome related pkg-config files. > These dependencies need to be added to Mk/Uses/gnome.mk. > > > - Possibly fix build on sparc64 (unconfirmed) > > > > PR: 212903 [1] > > Submitted by: jhibbits [1], strejda [2] > > Approved by: swills (mentor) I completely agree with that from a technical position. When stage-qa started complaining about indirect dependencies, I initially ignored them as it looked like an obvious error in the script. Surely, actual dependencies can be calculated recursively taking options into account. However, through both the actions taken on the PRs submitted at the time and direct statements when I questioned the situation, I was informed that the indirect dependencies should be added. I think it is completely unproductive and incorrect, but I had more important things to do than press the issue. I would be happy to cease adding indirect dependencies, which not only depend on the port's options but the options of the ports it depends upon, and the options of the ports those depend upon and so on. Has there been a change of policy and if so when can we expect to see a fixed stage-qa? It'll take some time to undo all the damage.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1651531.nGg9pBWiG5>