From owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 24 16:54:24 2013 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG> Delivered-To: python@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A90B685E; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:54:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-x231.google.com (mail-qa0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57C9C10B0; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:54:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id ii20so6373383qab.1 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 08:54:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=9UF8mv7NrRnETdUw2E/gVqs6faQ5OK0Mfe32gvxJ7N0=; b=FZvNoOk+pBTnIwXohBTZLLJw43EKBK4Fsv/poa+hZt+1vs6qBoMP1ExOftMOMf0sZ1 MrOG1QEWPdF0xG9a9b6s7uffAyQtVjjP6Qr+QGANWNQ40qN7ecpolKoBffKNIrHK4+zv qS8hoZHpuXNXmEGKKNQpPDNO1m/kSbf18Y5Z8TENa9Z/lDs1vPdy/Os8ImEU2ajReQlw cfznWQwwMIokgVNsMYpLhV9W6y39ObLRhZfGdNdUsXZBBy/CGo1GLniit6qjKPG36I4A 9hMDHey/M9xNfOx5Im/fXz3XST3S2O/OMCjCYuErlybQhb4VJdSpArja42oLBw19mZpv ORIw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.79.196 with SMTP id q4mr5422429qak.86.1387904063011; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 08:54:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.81.199 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Dec 2013 08:54:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52B9B9AF.7050400@marino.st> References: <52B9B5C4.8050101@marino.st> <CAHtVNLN1EZzN=RPFy_p=CUAc_Vy5TK0-00tEaBTECT2XKaJavQ@mail.gmail.com> <52B9B9AF.7050400@marino.st> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:54:22 +0000 Message-ID: <CAHtVNLP06eGCxwdCDzEsFWbe1Jjairn3X3jMy=5eJnu9RGFn4g@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Any fixes in work for py-setuptools for python 3.3+ ? From: William Grzybowski <william88@gmail.com> To: John Marino <marino@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: python <python@freebsd.org> X-BeenThere: freebsd-python@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Python issues <freebsd-python.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-python>, <mailto:freebsd-python-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-python/> List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-python@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-python-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-python>, <mailto:freebsd-python-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:54:24 -0000 On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 4:43 PM, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> wrote: > On 12/24/2013 17:33, William Grzybowski wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 4:26 PM, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> 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). Using poudriere, yes, it seems to be the case. > 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). If you want to provide packages with the non-default python version you can use DEFAULT_VERSIONS= python3.3 for your poudriere make.conf. The issue here is that the dependency list is built with poudriere using PKGORIGIN, however py-setuptools can have several distinct PKGNAME, depending on your chosen python version. We are not going to provide a new port for every python version of a package. -- William Grzybowski ------------------------------------------ Curitiba/PR - Brasil