Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:47:48 +1100
From:      Dewayne Geraghty <dewayne@heuristicsystems.com.au>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: STOP rust!
Message-ID:  <ea24fe70-6401-e86f-fa58-dbd4b43fc9e0@heuristicsystems.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20201110162440.0f8991a8@rimwks.local>
References:  <20201110162440.0f8991a8@rimwks.local>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/11/2020 12:24 am, Rozhuk Ivan wrote:
> Hi all!
> 
> With latest ports tree librsvg2-rust-2.50.0 is required to some ports.
> It want replace librsvg2-2.40.21.
> 
> I do not want build ugly rust during hours to build small lib in less than minute.
> 
> 
> Same with polkit & spidermonkey.
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/polkit/polkit/-/merge_requests/35
> 
> I remove polkit where it is possible.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> 

Good question Rozhuk, I've had a similar "problem" elsewhere.  The
workaround is to force your applications to break from the normal
maintenance/updating process.  There are two methods:

1. Lets say the upstream port that now wants to use librsvg2-rust-2.50.0 is
/usr/ports/risky/business

You'll need to modify
/usr/ports/risky/business/Makefile
to depend on librsvg2 and not librsvg2-rust

OR
2. You'll need to revert the port risky/business, everytime you perform
a /usr/ports update.

(Lookup svnlite help, or use something like
svnlite update /usr/ports
svnlite update -r '{2020-11-01}' /usr/ports/risky/business
the order is important)

Keep a record of which option you've chosen because you'll eventually
want to return to the normal way of doing things, because port
maintainers track the status of their ports - for security, feature and
bug updates and generously do the work for you.  (svnlite diff
/usr/ports may be helpful, unless you accidentally accept differences ;) )

The more promising approach is, as Yuri suggests, take up the issue with
the librsvg2 team.  However I've observed that when a downstream project
team invest in migrating to new tools, they're unlikely to rescind that
decision.

You'll also need to track the interaction of up/downstream tools because
eventually something will require a new feature in librsvg2 2.50+

Tough call, but the flexibility of the ports system helps.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ea24fe70-6401-e86f-fa58-dbd4b43fc9e0>