From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Dec 23 22:41:20 2009
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 5B599106566C; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:41:20 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:41:20 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Koop Mast <kwm@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20091223224120.GA55961@FreeBSD.org>
References: <200912232017.nBNKHVOJ059440@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20091223204905.GA33365@FreeBSD.org>
	<1261607271.1881.15.camel@headache.rainbow-runner.nl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1261607271.1881.15.camel@headache.rainbow-runner.nl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/www/webkit-gtk2 Makefile
	ports/www/webkit-gtk2/files patch-add-gzip
	patch-webkitnetworkresponse
X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree <cvs-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:41:20 -0000

On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 11:27:51PM +0100, Koop Mast wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 20:49 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > Weird, PR does not say what is exactly broken with flex(1) from the
> > base.  Could you enlighten us why the port cannot be patched so
> > third-party alternative from ports for existing tool in the base is
> > required?  Thanks.
> 
> First the webkit port already depended on flex. Since the configure
> script wants version at least 2.5.33, we need to depend on the port. The

OK, so that gets us to the next question: what particular features of
v2.5.33 break this port against flex v2.5.4 (version we have in base)?

> problem is detection of the flex binary. Without the patch mentioned in
> the pr, the port system can pick up the base flex, if the port flex
> isn't installed. So tell the port to look in localbase for the port
> flex. 

I can read and understand that patch.  What I was asking about if trivial
patch to configure script/source code could remedy the problem instead of
pulling extra dependency, just because it's newer than version we have in
the base.

./danfe