Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2022 15:58:30 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Providing base OpenSSL *.pc files needed Message-ID: <6c8e873e-fbe0-b857-1842-307c979a95e8@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20220318231622.1f511123b97c76f2bbe1568a@dec.sakura.ne.jp> References: <20220318231622.1f511123b97c76f2bbe1568a@dec.sakura.ne.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 22. 3. 18., Tomoaki AOKI wrote: > Can someone look into Bug 257659 [1]? > > I've encountered Bug 262569 [2]. > > ports git d4c9792fda7f introduced LIB_DEPENDS with > security/openssl, maybe because security/tpm2-tss > 3.2.0 hesitates to build without *.pc of OpenSSL. > > This causes ports depending on base OpenSSL to fail, > even on fetch. > > Putting partially modified *.pc files of security/openssl I've > uploaded on Bug 257659 into /usr/libdata/pkgconfig, applying > the patch I've uploaded on Bug 262569 and deinstalling > security/openssl allowed me to build security/tpm2-tss, updating > ports depending on base OpenSSL to succeed. > > */usr/ports/Mk/bsd.default-versions.mk defaults to base unless > any ports one is already installed or manually specified via > DEFAULT_VERSIONS. And /usr/ports/Mk/Uses/ssl.mk disallows > coexistence of ports build against base OpenSSL and against > ports security/openssl*. I personally don't think adding these files in the base is a good idea. However, it's portmgr's decision because it may break existing ports. Besides, portmgr owns ports/Mk/bsd.default-versions.mk and ports/Mk/Uses/ssl. > [1] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=257659 > [2] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=262569 Note I fixed PR262569 today. https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/commit/?id=aca6f9b18e874c73ac68990a2439ccec0be66ef0 Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6c8e873e-fbe0-b857-1842-307c979a95e8>