From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 23 12:48:34 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B244D1065670 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:48:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd06+XF=e1ce3fc2@mlists.homeunix.com) Received: from fallback-in1.mxes.net (fallback-out1.mxes.net [216.86.168.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819248FC0C for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:48:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd06+XF=e1ce3fc2@mlists.homeunix.com) Received: from mxout-03.mxes.net (mxout-03.mxes.net [216.86.168.178]) by fallback-in1.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA75E163F8C for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2008 08:33:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com. (unknown [87.81.140.128]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6319A23E498 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2008 08:33:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:33:13 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20080623133313.4d45819b@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <485F6585.2040307@FreeBSD.org> References: <20080622020728.GC13734@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <485DF018.5020703@FreeBSD.org> <485F4B7E.3040905@FreeBSD.org> <485F4EE1.9040603@FreeBSD.org> <485F5582.5040101@FreeBSD.org> <20080623084308.GA51236@wep4017.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de> <485F6585.2040307@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.4.0 (GTK+ 2.12.10; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Issues with portmaster X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:48:34 -0000 On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 10:57:41 +0200 Alex Dupre wrote: > Alexey Shuvaev ha scritto: > > It seems I don't understand something here. Can someone explain why > > jdk ports need to set BUILD_DEPENDS on diablo-jdk15 unconditionally? > > (nearly) every JDK port needs an already usable/installed JDK to > bootstrap the compilation. This is the reason of the BUILD_DEPENDS on > javac that you cannot remove. But the port providing the javac binary > could not be the diablo-jdk. The thing is that, IIRC, it doesn't have to create a dependency at all, unless the functionality is missing. It's not simply a case of it creating a normally dependency in the sense of: install this port if that file is not found. The makefile has logic to detect which java ports are installed, so it doesn't build a second bootstap port, but it doesn't carry it through to removing the dependency once bootstrapping is no longer required. I reported this problem a long time ago after I spotted that portmanager was reinstalling a linux java version. I thought the maintainer was going to fix it.