Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:55:35 +1100 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: lists@tcm.yi.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TEST_DEPENDS in all-depends-list et al.? Message-ID: <569C5427.3060506@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20160117-122b5781c3b2d8de@tcm.yi.org> References: <20160117-122b5781c3b2d8de@tcm.yi.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 18/01/2016 7:11 AM, lists@tcm.yi.org wrote: > Hi, > > I can hardly imagine it being intentional that TEST_DEPENDS > nowadays gets pulled into the all-depends-list, showconfig-recursive > or package-recursive target, is it? > > ports/head from around 2015-12-18 had about 15(?) dependencies in > www/py-requests for example. Now it wants to build over 90! > > How can I turn this off? Is this a bug? > > Regards By definition all-depends means (and should mean) literally all dependencies (*_DEPENDS), so in that regard it makes sense. Having said that, given the special nature of the test stage (orthogonal and independent to build/run dependencies), it sounds reasonable to ask whether they should be included in the target (all-depends-list) that has otherwise always only meant "what things does this port need to 'work'". My personal opinion is that all-depends-list is fine, and a less encompassing <something-else>-depends-list that only shows actual end-user functional dependencies is needed. This question is also relevant for the case of OPTION'al dependencies (they're not included in all-depends by default unless they're inOPTIONS_DEFAULT too), and would *also* apply if ports/pkg's had (or ever will have) any notion of 'suggested/recommended' but otherwise non-compulsory dependencies like other packaging systems. ./koobs
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?569C5427.3060506>