Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 9 Jun 2012 12:12:48 -0700
From:      Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com>
To:        Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk>
Cc:        FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com>
Subject:   Re: Firefox and firefox-remote options issues
Message-ID:  <CAN6yY1sA4GJLtUA=XkpwQf9421Jr41LMFAJnR1MR8=tkWOXbzA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FD39BE0.9080004@infracaninophile.co.uk>
References:  <CAN6yY1uPc4rC9fiimADFAKepQ9-e7%2BOFMuaGjV-Da3nZkZf3mA@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo839d_gwSf=GV0Ji1WCZjvAGg-_bp5FBmy5kYvh%2Bf7D9zDw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6yY1tcKct4RL7fcBnafCO-2Fd_sadqWKMFnhnY%2BVdrE2CR=g@mail.gmail.com> <4FD39BE0.9080004@infracaninophile.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Matthew Seaman
<m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> wrote:
> On 09/06/2012 17:02, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> Wow! Not what I expected to find!
>>
>> Yes, /var/db/ports/firefox/options is there, but
>> /var/db/ports/firefox-remote/options is not. And, when I look at
>> /var/db/ports/firefox/options, it actually contains the options for
>> firefox-remote!
>>
>> If I go into www/firefox and make config,
>> /var/db/ports/firefox-remote/options contains the right options. Ouch.
>>
>> I'll need to re-build firefox-remote later, but at least I now expect
>> firefox to build as I want it to. Something in parsing the port name
>> seems to have been broken.
>
> That looks to be an accident. =A0Both those ports share the same options =
file:
>
> % cd /usr/ports
> % make -C www/firefox -V OPTIONSFILE
> /var/db/ports/firefox/options
> % make -C www/firefox-remote -V OPTIONSFILE
> /var/db/ports/firefox/options
>
> Ultimately this is because both those ports have PORTNAME=3Dfirefox, whic=
h
> means both of them end up with the same UNIQUENAME, which is clearly a
> bit contrary to the intent of that variable.
>
> This would have been the case even before OPTIONSng -- the location
> where options would be stored hasn't changed. =A0However, firefox-remote
> doesn't set any options of its own, so previously it wouldn't have used
> its options file at all. =A0One of the effects of OPTIONSng is that every
> port technically now uses options so would now use an options file. =A0So
> collisions like this are going to show up.
>
> However, not all ports sharing OPTIONSFILEs are accidental. =A0For
> instance Postgresql ports all use a shared file quite deliberately.
>
> Attached is a list of all the ports with a non-unique UNIQUENAME setting.

Ahh. If I'd had some time, I suspect I would have spotted it. I am
amazed that it has never bitten me in the past as I have had this port
installed for over a decade. Of course, it would not have shown up
using portupgrade, but portmaster does show it as it queries for
options for all ports to be built BEFORE it starts building. I guess I
never noticed that firefox-remote always asks for options but was
seldom rebuilt while firefox is built frequently, but I guess I've
never done a system where both were installed by portmaster in a
single operation.

Thanks.  I'll drop the maintainer of firefox-remote a note open a PR on it.
R. Kevin Oberman - Network Engineer
rkoberman@gmail.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1sA4GJLtUA=XkpwQf9421Jr41LMFAJnR1MR8=tkWOXbzA>