From owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 14 07:55:04 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: python@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6029A1065679; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:55:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erwin@mail.droso.net) Received: from mail.droso.net (koala.ipv6.droso.net [IPv6:2001:6c8:6:c:20d:56ff:fe6f:f935]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E327C8FC20; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:55:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erwin@mail.droso.net) Received: by mail.droso.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 7925B1CC11; Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:55:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:55:02 +0200 From: Erwin Lansing To: Li-Wen Hsu Message-ID: <20090714075502.GO83265@droso.net> References: <200907091332.n69DWgXF055913@pointyhat.freebsd.org> <1e39c0a90907091948i5b11a4fdrb0d75cd08f245eac@mail.gmail.com> <20090710145547.GE86673@droso.net> <1e39c0a90907120222m4d0d7736ga6a7221e514b836b@mail.gmail.com> <20090713173739.GJ83265@droso.net> <20090714005451.GA90576@FreeBSD.cs.nctu.edu.tw> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/2994txjAzEdQwm5" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090714005451.GA90576@FreeBSD.cs.nctu.edu.tw> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD/i386 7.2-STABLE User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: python@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports with duplicate LATEST_LINKS X-BeenThere: freebsd-python@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Python issues List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:55:04 -0000 --/2994txjAzEdQwm5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 08:54:51AM +0800, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 19:37:40 +0200, Erwin Lansing wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 05:22:14PM +0800, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I think these two are not an issue. ?Default Python version is swi= tched to 2.6. > > > >> > > > >> But how this report generated? ?Switching happened before > > > >> databases/py25-bsddb repocpoied. > > > >> > > > > The script is in Tools/scripts/check-latest-link. ?Could this be ca= used > > > > by the installed python version on the system it runs on? > > >=20 > > > Sounds possible, and that's what bsd.python.mk does. > > > databases/py25-bsddb is a slave port of databases/py-bsddb, > > > which generates python 2.5 package for some ports depend on > > > specified python version. When a system with python 2.5 > > > as the default setting, databases/py-bsddb and databases/py25-bsddb > > > should generate same package. So now the problem is, is it OK for th= em > > > have same LATEST_LINK? Or we can just ignore this problem, since this > > > should not effect official package build, and the latest links on the= ftp. > > >=20 > > As you probably saw on the ports list, this also broke INDEX (not > > noticed before because the INDEX script has wedged it zfs mount). It > > looks like overriding LOCALBASE to /nonexistent does fix both issue as > > the script will no longer see the locally installed python version. > > This solves this issue. >=20 > Sorry that I am a bit confusted about what you mean. Are you suggesting > me to override these ports' LOCALBASE to /nonexistent ? Or this means > that everything works fine now? >=20 The latter. I was just explaining what I changed in the script to make it less confused. No need for you to change anything. Cheers, -erwin --=20 Erwin Lansing (o_ _o) http://droso.org \\\_\ /_/// The rest is silence <____) (____> erwin@lansing.dk --/2994txjAzEdQwm5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFKXDnWqy9aWxUlaZARAlrIAJ9lFCwkSgt9nZGP1wEqxc9VY9KmrgCgnltN 3IUutwDTeQxPHPl54txQhSA= =56yt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/2994txjAzEdQwm5--