From owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 24 16:43:39 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: python@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFE27337 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:43:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A722C1FEA for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:43:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.113] (c-174-61-88-207.hsd1.fl.comcast.net [174.61.88.207]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3924F43552; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:43:28 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <52B9B9AF.7050400@marino.st> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 17:43:27 +0100 From: John Marino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: William Grzybowski Subject: Re: Any fixes in work for py-setuptools for python 3.3+ ? References: <52B9B5C4.8050101@marino.st> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: python X-BeenThere: freebsd-python@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Python issues List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:43:39 -0000 On 12/24/2013 17:33, William Grzybowski wrote: > On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 4:26 PM, John Marino wrote: >> Recently, probably caused by recent changes to devel/py-setuptools, >> around 6 ports broke all in the same way. An example is below: >> Is python@ aware and are these ports going to be restored? >> I can provide a list of the broken ports I've seen so far if not. > > These are not port breakages. > > poudriere builds only one package per port, devel/py-setuptools builds > py27-setuptools because python.27 is the default version. > > sysutils/brebis for instance, can only work for python 3.3+, it > depends on setuptools but it cant build because setuptools was built > for the default version. > > It was not a problem before in poudriere because setuptools was not a > build dependency. Are you telling me that it is impossible to provide these ports as binary packages? Personally, I see a regression because they were building before. Now they aren't (as you mention above). The impact is that they will disappear from dports, because we don't feature ports that can't have binary packages. I'm sure there was a good reason for the change that caused these ports not to build in poudriere, but that change did cause damage. I'm not in a position to say if the tradeoff is worth it because I don't understand what was gained (only what was lost). John