From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon Feb 22 20:42:35 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB40AB0B35 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 20:42:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from be-well.ilk.org (be-well.ilk.org [23.30.133.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B88B0194A; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 20:42:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from lowell-desk.lan (router.lan [172.30.250.2]) by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6590933C1E; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:42:24 -0500 (EST) Received: by lowell-desk.lan (Postfix, from userid 1147) id 7ECD339843; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:42:23 -0500 (EST) From: Lowell Gilbert To: Andriy Gapon Cc: Perry Hutchison , freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: unexpected package dependency References: <56c43d57.Pot24goK72QkTKqk%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <56C45B9C.7090808@FreeBSD.org> <56c6760d.nR7fjvuf3gEK3yNY%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <56CB2BD4.1040908@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:42:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: <56CB2BD4.1040908@FreeBSD.org> (Andriy Gapon's message of "Mon, 22 Feb 2016 17:40:04 +0200") Message-ID: <44mvqs4gup.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 20:42:36 -0000 Andriy Gapon writes: > On 19/02/2016 03:55, Perry Hutchison wrote: >> Andriy Gapon wrote: >>> On 17/02/2016 11:28, Perry Hutchison wrote: >>>> I had not expected to find gcc listed (in packagesite.yaml) as a >>>> dependency of the sysutils/cpuburn package. I can understand a >>>> _port_ needing gcc (at build time), but does the cpuburn _package_ >>>> actually require gcc at _runtime_? >>> >>> I don't believe so. AFAIR, it builds static binaries. >> >> So would the inclusion of gcc in the "deps" for sysutils/cpuburn (in >> packagesite.yaml) be caused by a problem with the way the dependencies >> are specified in the port, or with the way they are handled by the >> package-generation mechanism? (I'm trying to figure out which to file >> a PR against -- and I'm not all that familiar with pkgng details.) >> > > My recollection is that the ports infrastructure does not allow to specify > whether a non-base compiler (like GCC for FreeBSD 11) is required only as a > compiler (that is, only during the build time) or if its run-time is required as > well. The latter is always assumed. USES_GCC doesn't support that, but using BUILD_DEPENDS with RUN_DEPENDS does. The downside to that is you have to specify a particular version when you otherwise would not have needed to do so. Adding a knob to bsd.gcc.mk to allow a port to say it doesn't need the RUN_DEPENDS would do the right thing. > But I could be mistaken. I've probably overlooked a lot of things, but I did *test* my suggestion, so I'm probably not completely wrong.