From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 31 11:28:15 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0784106564A for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 11:28:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mezz.freebsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-f182.google.com (mail-ob0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B5B58FC1D for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 11:28:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obbun3 with SMTP id un3so6860120obb.13 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 04:28:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=rozPYsJ7428mOXzpTyd4IhIf2DvBNoaEAwTqMh/ZqLM=; b=ApubgHHiMP5M8I8wybhnkkIBanFwPLEs6yDvBJ2KuD/OIa1CuwYVAAHOoqxAHB6PhS debk3BimiL9HWuu9m70ScP6eAknk3ErGAEh9aGBvWIEd5adLukNw6jjPJ8IZXtmMaKmo 73lMLmXJ8S39UkpsCDBk7QLcUaX/wzSLrf36+p7chO7KoBTncnaBl/Hu/IjUGLzRzASn Lqm/DI9ElG8sK5ih6vk2mwDSUZWTeCtrnk4Ww749+3ZhPxTy8AmzHChOG8f4IYT1imBU sYPCismaCDA6etBTkDDbRnIHCbLH8W3IfT4+ObDSCh6/haJmu0b5dRpKH7n7ow5ZJU5S unhQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.30.170 with SMTP id t10mr7268702oeh.10.1346412495020; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 04:28:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.97.168 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 04:28:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120831032033.GE31703@nanocomputer.nanoman.ca> References: <20120830182257.GC31703@nanocomputer.nanoman.ca> <20120830214321.GD31703@nanocomputer.nanoman.ca> <20120831032033.GE31703@nanocomputer.nanoman.ca> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 06:28:14 -0500 Message-ID: From: Jeremy Messenger To: nanoman@nanoman.ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: WANT_GNOME Causes Automatic Dependencies X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 11:28:15 -0000 On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 10:20 PM, A.J. Kehoe IV (Nanoman) wrote: > Does anyone maintain a dependencies map for GNOME? Not that I know of. Speaking of dependencies... Since the GNOME 2 is dead already. I think it's good time for us to remove the GNOME 2 dependencies option in some of ports. For example, editors/vim has GNOME2 option so remove that part. > I'm thinking of > something like this, but parsable, legible, and current: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~adamw/gnome_kde_deps/gnome2-lite.png > > It would also need to indicate how optional components fit together. > > [...] > > >>> I'm not fond of my misc/gnome-components method either, so any >>> alternative >>> ideas are very welcome. All I've done thus far is created a Makefile >>> with >>> an OPTIONS list for the 97 components from bsd.gnome.mk. >>> >>> What do you suggest for a real fix/clean? Based on your response, the >>> ideal >>> fix has at least two attributes: >>> >>> 1. No automatic dependencies. >>> >>> 2. An option to disable specific components. >> >> >> I meant by remove the HAVE_GNOME from port Makefile then switch to either: >> >> 1) automatic dependency by using exists() or >> 2) OPTIONS if the port's configure provides flag to disable. >> >> It is unnecessary to make it complicates with gnome-components when >> the standard solution available in our ports tree. As for the #1, yes, >> it has to be there because a few configure files do that without >> option to disable (blame it on upstream). > > > I'm not opposed to writing patches that will make the WANT_GNOME ports > declare their dependencies predictably. There are approximately 183 ports > using WANT_GNOME, so writing these patches is going to take me several days, > followed by weeks of waiting for maintainer updates. I might be able to get > through this faster by asking the maintainers to assist me, but I expect to > have to do most on my own. > > I'm absolutely willing to abort my misc/gnome-components plan in favour of a > better idea. If writing patches for roughly 183 ports is considered a > better idea, then this is what I will do instead. Who said that you have to do it alone? :-) If you want to do it as soon as possible. You can gather a team to hunt down those ports then give a big patch to portmgr to do the test in pointyhat-exp. When everything is perfect then commit it into ports tree with portmgr's approval without need to ask each maintainers. You have my support and approval to mess around with gnome@ ports. Show portmgr about this email threads. If you can wait then I (and maybe kwm) will be able to help you with it. We have enough stuff on our plates right now by trying to push GNOME 3 into ports tree after the 9.1 released. FreeBSD GNOME Team only have two active people, kwm and me, that are maintaining about over 460 ports (plus GNOME 3 and MATE ports that are yet to commit). We need new blood to join gnome@. > It is indeed a problem when a port doesn't respect configure arguments to > enable or disable optional features, but exists() causes automatic > dependencies. Fortunately, there are two solutions: > > A. Convince the upstream source that they need to fix this at their end. > Sending them a patch is the best way. It's very low chance for GNOME 2 stuff as a lot of GNOME 2 apps are no longer maintain by upstream. > B. Write a patch that fixes this within the FreeBSD Ports Collection. Such > a patch may require upkeep by the port maintainer. I don't have any of problem if anyone want to patch it. As for me, I just don't use exists() and add dependency by default without provide option. I know I am lazy. ;-) Cheers, Mezz -- mezz.freebsd@gmail.com - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org