From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sat Jan 14 16:57:48 2017 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 21E28CAF7A3 for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2017 16:57:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 000B513AC for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2017 16:57:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from Julian-MBP3.local (ppp121-45-252-76.lns20.per4.internode.on.net [121.45.252.76]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v0EGvgX0016320 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 14 Jan 2017 08:57:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Subject: Re: openldap-client vs openldap-sasl-client To: Jan Bramkamp , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <34b66662-a2d7-706d-3653-e0ffc9bf81b2@rlwinm.de> <4c8d3ad3-156d-e5a4-0051-9b6e590530ce@freebsd.org> From: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <6cf7d51d-f128-9014-970d-0b719f8cbdf4@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 00:57:36 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4c8d3ad3-156d-e5a4-0051-9b6e590530ce@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 16:57:48 -0000 On 5/01/2017 6:44 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 5/01/2017 6:30 PM, Jan Bramkamp wrote: >> On 04/01/2017 18:32, Andriy Gapon wrote: >>> >>> Do you I understand correctly that it is impossible now to install >>> both samba44 >>> and libreoffice using the official FreeBSD package repository? >>> Or samba44 and KDE? >>> >>> If yes, then that sucks... > > similar happened recently with the two jpeg libraries. > They can't be installed at the same time but some packages wanted > one and some the other. > >> >> Yes and yes it sucks. The "solution" is to build your own repo and >> set the right flags to always use the same LDAP client port. With >> binary packages and the speed of modern x86_64 systems I for one no >> longer see removing SASL support from OpenLDAP as useful enough to >> justify the complexity. Are there any reasons other than saved >> build time to disable this dependency (e.g. a bad security track >> record/process, different licenses)? >> _______________________ no, I think the "solution" is to think of an architectural way around this. One thought: maybe we can have a 'virtual dependency" that more than one package can satisfy? the USES stuff seems to be heading in that direction. Maybe someone who knows more about it can tell us more about it? I'd also like to see packages have more htan one way to install, to give the same effect as the linux -devel and regular packages. pkg install --runtime vs pkg install --devel (and I'd like to see a --minimal, no docs, examples etc.) Each would have their own depednencies as well, probably building up from minimal->runtime->devel