Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 19 Nov 2023 19:54:06 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 275183] devel/p5-EV: Update to 4.34
Message-ID:  <bug-275183-7788-jl2P8qC60X@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-275183-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-275183-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D275183

--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Timofeev <vovkasm@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Sergei Vyshenski from comment #4)

Hi!

Sure, it is correct sentence that RUN_DEPENDS in most cases can safely be a=
dded
to BUILD_DEPENDS. Moreover for pure perl modules configure/build step is so
thin that rarely any additional build-only deps ever required (except
ExtUtils::MakeMaker/Module::Build which added semi-automatically and in most
cases just check requirements and copy files to destination).

But! :-)
1. This port is not pure perl software, this is fullfeatured C library which
requires C toolchain to be built (with all sorts of required configuration
steps).
2. This is not about adding RUN_DEPENDS to BUILD_DEPENDS, but opposite... W=
hy
we ever need to setup things that only required at build step? I still don't
understand )

Can I ask to return to current state of dependencies until more strong
arguments will emerge?

--=20
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-275183-7788-jl2P8qC60X>