Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 02 Mar 2012 12:03:09 -0500
From:      "John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell" <johnandsara2@cox.net>
To:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   dep-trace  v.  tsort  (mac ports depends support)
Message-ID:  <4F50FD4D.9000106@cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20110710151354.GA25475@r500-debian>
References:  <4E18ABB1.4010304@cox.net> <20110709194639.GA4914@elie> <4E18EE60.7010402@cox.net> <20110710151354.GA25475@r500-debian>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

BSD and Apple needs tsort(1) for portage still I believe.

Topological sorting isn't quite right packaging.

Please see:  http://sourceforge.net/projects/dep-trace

It is a "drop-in" replacement (operates like a /bin/tsort) but is right for pkg depends

(ie, for portage: you need to dl source, order of compile may be required, sometimes gets missing
message or "loop in depends" message when attempting to compile and install pkg)

I'm a debian user but i wish I had a bsd machine :) So i do not know allot of BSD maintainer /
mailing list specifics.  Please give me a handicap there !

Thanks and thanks again,

	John

p.s.

(dep-trace itself has no depends (a /bin), has improvements, and is "more hackable" than tsort as to
coding new ordering rules against lists - which in tsort "loop detected attempting to recover" is
not as easy i feel.





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F50FD4D.9000106>