Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 10:54:50 -0400 From: Steve Wills <swills@FreeBSD.org> To: Torsten Zuehlsdorff <tz@FreeBSD.org>, ruby@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Feature-Request: pessimistic operator in ports-tree Message-ID: <24d2a341-88a7-c99e-1058-6d351014930e@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <3434c19e-59b3-261a-ef18-6911bba0e072@FreeBSD.org> References: <3434c19e-59b3-261a-ef18-6911bba0e072@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --mX8go5vhQm7TGUgEPs868Ae2Hn5mSjEAt Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="T0nGbV7RdK90W1rNu0b2TjGp4E0DNv6iu"; protected-headers="v1" From: Steve Wills <swills@FreeBSD.org> To: Torsten Zuehlsdorff <tz@FreeBSD.org>, ruby@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <24d2a341-88a7-c99e-1058-6d351014930e@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Feature-Request: pessimistic operator in ports-tree References: <3434c19e-59b3-261a-ef18-6911bba0e072@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <3434c19e-59b3-261a-ef18-6911bba0e072@FreeBSD.org> --T0nGbV7RdK90W1rNu0b2TjGp4E0DNv6iu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On 09/28/2016 03:04, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: > Aloha, >=20 > i'm working quite a while on the ruby-ports and it is often annoying. > Even after excessive testing and some more real-world testing (thanks t= o > all helpers!) its totally normal, that thinks break. >=20 > I found one of the main problems is the pessimistic operator in the > gemspecs/Gemfiles. Buildtests of all dependencies run fine, we commit > the update and than some Gem break, because it defined ~> 1.5.2 and you= > just updated to 1.6. In the Makefile >=3D 1.5.2 says everything is fine= =2E To me it seem rather that the problem is gemspecs over-using or mis-using the pessimistic operator. If the gemspec correctly specified what actually worked, this wouldn't be an issue. > I personally think most of the rubygem breakage can be prevented by > teaching the ports-tree about the pessimistic operator. It is far easie= r > to build-test 300 dependencies than to really check if they are able to= > start. Or even if they run correctly. How would this help exactly? It seems to me it would make it easier to figure out where the mismatch is but wouldn't actually solve the problem. And this isn't even the hard part, building all the packages doesn't really take much time. But you would still have to correct the gemspec or create multiple ports/pkgs for each version needed. What am I missing? > What do you think about this? >=20 > Also i believe its not a rubygem only feature. I stumbled across > multiple software which expect an explicit version or an version range > or even disallow a single version and accept all other. I think a patch would help discussion. I'm not unsympathetic, it is a pain. But I just don't understand how this would fix anything. Perhaps some sort of tool that would check these things would be helpful? Steve --T0nGbV7RdK90W1rNu0b2TjGp4E0DNv6iu-- --mX8go5vhQm7TGUgEPs868Ae2Hn5mSjEAt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQGQBAEBCgB6BQJX69m6XxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ5OEZBNDE0QTVDMkEwRUY5Q0ZEMEFEMERG NUNGNjJCMzIwN0IxQkExExxzd2lsbHNAZnJlZWJzZC5vcmcACgkQ9c9isyB7G6Eq 1wgAgaj4F610sEwVBw81CfqQTYxVAjYfkHeDcOigJ0/X7MpDKbHWdg942W9H4G5p o7Pqoon6QDfeg9BDH6Hwpb1Cjhm3e9P/5c/eD4aPpVSdMvG1LzjcJyLqDiDZv4mr PrCnv2CkoroPjhaNkLRXVnbzbBcSg+OQRbm3/H20ObPlbK0tDxdfieK3vuuQ+yt/ 6rYsRDFlf2zjdY2UZ/LhLiVsamALRm9qNlhYmovoXwIk/PlTI6suOujT2e6qchAs 4yAa0xh3Cf3bkSLZ1FERhudaYSkx9WXWN4VkCG01AyJSypjJQaBS3O3OwcJj7mZi +mI+YQBKa6ojJz91vkjK0H8Iuw== =f0dp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mX8go5vhQm7TGUgEPs868Ae2Hn5mSjEAt--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?24d2a341-88a7-c99e-1058-6d351014930e>