From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sun Jan 10 21:29:46 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675AFA6AD41; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:29:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thierry@pompo.net) Received: from mx1b.lautre.net (etna.lautre.net [80.67.160.72]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.lautre.net", Issuer "COMODO RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D5541F14; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:29:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thierry@pompo.net) Received: from graf.pompo.net (graf.pompo.net [78.225.128.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: thierry@pompo.net) by mx1b.lautre.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E9357E084; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:29:42 +0100 (CET) Received: by graf.pompo.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 9DF2749844C; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:29:41 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:29:41 +0100 From: Thierry Thomas To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports, dependencies and conflicts with other ports' options ? Message-ID: <20160110212941.GG2172@graf.pompo.net> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org References: <20160110205123.GY35480@home.opsec.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="LZvS9be/3tNcYl/X" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160110205123.GY35480@home.opsec.eu> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 10.2-STABLE amd64 Organization: Kabbale Eros X-Face: (hRbQnK~Pt7$ct`!fupO(`y_WL4^-Iwn4@ly-.,[4xC4xc; y=\ipKMNm<1J>lv@PP~7Z<.t KjAnXLs: X-PGP: 0xF1C516B3C8359753 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:29:46 -0000 --LZvS9be/3tNcYl/X Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le dim 10 jan 16 =E0 21:51:23 +0100, Kurt Jaeger =E9crivait=A0: > Hi! Hello, > There's a PR for a new port, see >=20 > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D202754 >=20 > which has the problem that if some other port has some option > set, this will cause this new port fail on build. >=20 > So the question is: Is there any idea on how one might > document / encode this kind of CONFLICT ? >=20 > I'm pretty sure there's no mechanism in place right now, > any ideas on a mechanism that would cover this ? Next releases of pkg should support flavors, but in the meantime, I would suggest to create slaves ports with the conflicting options disabled, and then depend on these ones. Regards, --=20 Th. Thomas. --LZvS9be/3tNcYl/X Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWks1EXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFNTM2QkU4NTM4NTM5OUQwMEI2RkFBNzZG MUM1MTZCM0M4MzU5NzUzAAoJEPHFFrPINZdTrqkP/1A7GT09LMj6Tl6SBEIy5JZ8 hzAYFPgpjPi569wELRPSYpoaaED26y/0qBjlEdYTp0od94pVFO5AKMSFuGusCET+ 0468HFgSk6uW2rXKatlcWjJU+ntZI6BNFbifrqPBXGuyXzCU6rJw2NVuNqyAmb2t Kn+LFnMFit8TH8NkNJPXdLvHt/oWdBH9wf6z1o76VkRAX6iEdH7ZEKxkT4CL4XIv KPNOmgHHyiasIHAgX+YvIym0DvGng3l2huzK9opVD7bBIasQdCDgX7C0W13u2ewE iGugSwNssVzt5vUYgmEKuMKTt3klqVtsXjUFTLVY8wzymmdfdn07yjzcbaQyma9e 8LZ2WlR99+JoFmPpn2USt6F70k3Y1iQpC5jdc0FKTfdSIuXBK+hq9j4u/M7bfBdR g/yCysfZSaSDcp/Lymsyi2wTOaNQO93uaB4yQ3rqIvYNZp9Jz+1QpKUAzygp1YrT u4OzRW+5iJdOgFZNCH6OLl+OoyyafcNJxeb1Kjwp4Gf6maaX8K4bin5mK1/wYKH8 HmSUexPDO7MVR1XJ4BMIBZfaqMXEYb897qMZyHuELqlCs28t/vfn/9KtlwROt4eh CONRFtJW8gHH702tzl2SlPov+TSCBDIamEPPczJQV3C6WS4T/8QWL/v862xepZhq CQjm0ypPjUNBXE4FKaxQ =ijuA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --LZvS9be/3tNcYl/X--