From owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Feb 23 07:28:47 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-python@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E16D616A4CE
	for <python@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:28:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miffy.openlook.org (openlook.org [211.236.182.73])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC0A643D1F
	for <python@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:28:47 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from perky@miffy.openlook.org)
Received: by miffy.openlook.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 029EFA9C2; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 00:32:19 +0900 (KST)
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 00:32:19 +0900
From: Hye-Shik Chang <perky@i18n.org>
To: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
Message-ID: <20040223153219.GA92513@i18n.org>
References: <40387643.9040805@fillmore-labs.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <40387643.9040805@fillmore-labs.com>
X-Accept-Language: ko, en
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i
cc: FreeBSD Python <python@FreeBSD.org>
cc: Khairil Yusof <kaeru@inigo-tech.com>
Subject: Re: USE_ZOPE vs. python modules
X-BeenThere: freebsd-python@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Python issues <freebsd-python.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:28:48 -0000

On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 10:28:35AM +0100, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
> Dear maintainers,
> 
> the breakage of www/zope-cmfphoto
>  http://bento.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-4-full/zope-cmfphoto-0.4.r2.log
> seems to have roots in the current bsd.python.mk structure.
> 
> Basically if you define USE_ZOPE in a port, you'll get Python 2.1 by 
> default,
> if you just define USE_PYTHON You'll get Python 2.3.
> 
> The result is that if a port that uses zope depends on an another that 
> doesn't,
> you'll get different versions of the python modules (py21-imaging vs. 
> py23-imaging
> in this case), which breaks installation.

Correct.

> The workaround would be either to set the system-wide default to 2.1 or 
> update
> zope to a version supporting 2.3. I am aware of the recent thread `Zope 
> 2.6.4 vs 2.7',
> I just wanted to notify you because www/zope-cmfphoto is marked as BROKEN 
> (and
> scheduled for removal), for reasons that lie beyond the responsibilites of 
> this
> port (or its maintainer).

I'd like to see updating www/zope to 2.7 as soon as possible. I
heard that 2.7 has enough backward-compatibility and we can avoid
the problem then.  Because current port infrastructure doesn't allow
multiple installations from a same origin, we'll need to introduce
"instance" concept for pkgdb. eg.

this line on Makefile

PYTHON_INSTALL_PERVERSION=	yes

applies bsd.python.mk

.ifdef PYTHON_PERVERSION_INSTALLATION
PKGINSTANCE=	${PYTHON_VERSION}
.endif

then check-already-installed target of bsd.pkg.mk checks
@comment INSTANCE:python2.3
and if current port has different instance string, allows further
installation phases.

This is still a rough sketch. And I think "instance" concept will
be useful for apache/perl/ruby ports, too. What do you think on
this?


Regards,
Hye-Shik