Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 24 Dec 2015 07:51:20 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 205565] Variations when using autoplist and concurrent
Message-ID:  <bug-205565-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205565

            Bug ID: 205565
           Summary: Variations when using autoplist and concurrent
           Product: Ports & Packages
           Version: Latest
          Hardware: Any
                OS: Any
            Status: New
          Severity: Affects Only Me
          Priority: ---
         Component: Individual Port(s)
          Assignee: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
          Reporter: FreeBSD@ShaneWare.Biz

Created attachment 164584
  --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=164584&action=edit
new line_profiler port

Wanting to try out a python module called line_profiler I created a new port
for it (shar file of what I have done attached), fairly simple setup, as it
includes two scripts that are intended to be run from the cli I installed them
into bin. As autoplist didn't pickup these two scripts I then added them to
PLIST_FILES in the Makefile and concurrent then suffixes them correctly when
needed.

That's all fine and works for python 2.7 and 3.4

Now when I build using python 3.5 autoplist finds one of the scripts but not
the other so I end up needing the following in the Makefile -

.if ${PYTHON_VER} == 3.5
PLIST_FILES=    bin/line_profiler
.else
PLIST_FILES=    bin/line_profiler bin/kernprof
.endif

I'm not concerned if autoplist misses the two scripts as setting PLIST_FILES is
easy enough, but it seems odd that one version will give different results.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-205565-13>