Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:41:20 +0100 From: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, dinoex@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How to handle upgrade of libnotify when cups-client-1.4.8 is marked as broken Message-ID: <CADLo839RYem1ngPsxbO%2BxtW6QXpR5jhEDfvMjssGAS8_4V3jAQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110828183300.GX17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <4E5A48AC.6050201@eskk.nu> <20058.20743.791783.342355@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <BLU0-SMTP182102B9C96837517ECB6BB93150@phx.gbl> <20110828172651.GB277@magic.hamla.org> <20110828173059.GT17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20110828181356.GD277@magic.hamla.org> <20110828183300.GX17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 28 August 2011 19:33, Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 02:13:59PM -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
>> On Sun, 2011-08-28 at 20:30:59 +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 01:26:51PM -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
>> > > On Sun, 2011-08-28 at 11:30:27 -0400, Carmel wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > My question is what changed? It worked before updating "libnotify"=
. Is
>> > > > "libnotify" the culprit or "GNUTLS" or something else and why didn=
't
>> > > > anyone catch this problem sooner?
>> > >
>> > > The chain of dependencies during the libnotify update prompted the
>> > > upgrade of cups. =A0The latter's OpenSSL interfaces are explicitly
>> > > thread-safe, which GNU TLS is not.
>> > >
>> > > > There appears to be a lot of material released lately that is eith=
er
>> > > > broken or requiring a considerable amount of manual intervention.
>> > > > Perhaps a moratorium (port freeze) should be considered until all =
of
>> > > > the outstanding problems have been corrected.
>> > >
>> > > We are sorry for the inconvenience which is surely frustrating, but
>> > > freezing the tree because of this does not seem appropriate.
>> >
>> > Might be, completely ignoring the option 'use gnutls' in cups ports,
>> > until it can be made working, will change everybody life to be easier.
>>
>> What "might be"?
>>
>> As already noted, the GNUTLS option now defaults to OFF and users are
>> warned (via the BROKEN construct) if it is selected.
>
> Apparently, this have to be written explicitely. Users, who upgrade
> their ports, are not presented with the configuration dialog. Using
> automated tool like portupgrade, all you get is a list of the failed
> ports. After that, user needs to start investigation, spending his
> own time and possibly time of the people on list.
>
> Ignoring or removing the option makes the ports upgrade without user
> intervention.
>
> I am willing to spend some more time describing unobvious points of
> this consideration.
Alright, how about this?
RCS file: /home/pcvs/ports/print/cups-base/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.162
diff -u -r1.162 Makefile
--- Makefile 25 Aug 2011 14:54:39 -0000 1.162
+++ Makefile 28 Aug 2011 18:40:24 -0000
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@
.endif
.if defined(WITH_GNUTLS)
-BROKEN=3D gnutls does not support threads yet
+BROKEN=3D gnutls does not support threads yet; disable the GNUTLS
option to build
CONFIGURE_ARGS+=3D --disable-openssl --enable-gnutls
CONFIGURE_ENV+=3D PKGCONFIG=3D"${LOCALBASE}/bin/pkg-config"
LIB_DEPENDS+=3D gnutls-openssl.27:${PORTSDIR}/security/gnutls
Dirk, do you have any objections if I were to commit that?
Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo839RYem1ngPsxbO%2BxtW6QXpR5jhEDfvMjssGAS8_4V3jAQ>