Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 16:49:47 -0600 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: Chris H <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com>, ports@FreeBSD.org, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Upcoming change in dependency registration Message-ID: <54C17E8B.1060400@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <7996d75b9d724f65af7dd3f63033eb03@ultimatedns.net> References: <20150122180912.GE81001@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <7996d75b9d724f65af7dd3f63033eb03@ultimatedns.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --KEAcA8HQ0eCGeEpdODV96PcjH0WnIbe0A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 1/22/2015 2:24 PM, Chris H wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 19:09:13 +0100 Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org= > wrote >=20 >> Hi all >> >> Some changes are coming to the ports, the diff is rather simple, but t= he >> change of behaviour is worse notifying all maintainers: >> >> Currently and since very long the dependency registration in the ports= tree >> is based on the origin of the packages. which makes it unfriendly with= >> FLAVORS and Subpackages. >> >> The ports tree has been changed in the branch >> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/projects/rework-dependency-registrati= on/ >> >> so now it basically do the same kind of mechanism which is done during= the > .. >> >> Last side effect it also prepare the way to be able to depend on provi= des and >> depend correctly on "smart dep" aka "perl5>=3D5.18.2_3<5.20" >> >> This change is being exp-run and will be committed as soon as it is st= able >> enough >> >> Best regards, >> Bapt > Hi Bapt. > Will this be OR'ed? In other words; will this create compatibility > issues for anyone using ports without this change? While I develop > on 11-CURRENT. I wonder about developers that aren't, or haven't yet > incorporated this new change? (granted, developers *should* always > be running *fairly* current revision(s)). > I guess I'm just wondering if ports, and those still using them, that > don't *yet* incorporate this change, will still continue to work > as intended/expected (at least for awhile). >=20 > I'm still reading the proposed changes. :) >=20 > Thanks. >=20 > --Chris >=20 For the most part, ports written after this change can be used without this change. The py-27 py-33 multiple installations stuff maybe not. This required action here is to fix dependencies depending on *generated files* rather than *plist files*. This is a proper fix even without this change. So the ports will still work without this change. The bigger picture changes, such as sub-packages, flavors and flexible dependencies, are not here yet. Those changes will most definitely not be forward-compat once they go in. Ports written after those won't work with older framework. We're not quite there yet though. And in general, the ports tree is a single snapshot. It's only supported to build a port using the exact Mk/ it was checked-in as. At my work we violate this frequently though. It's on us/you to deal with this if you choose to go off book. --=20 Regards, Bryan Drewery --KEAcA8HQ0eCGeEpdODV96PcjH0WnIbe0A 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 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUwX6LAAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPWIoIAI7WgvVPzR0d98rSV3OZjy/L Ef2nVgl+tRO/zXsSBBq2qyf8CFs8x0/0xNby4/ZebgIAkE6pykC5lOTp9KiqMp9V /VPX0LrI8nEP6+5pUajorEo59SO8pVj/2AUafoOkG8+4kYWc1MprXGfyRP7JpPpX Y4y5kbGGk4oTyN048K+zd8/fc7G83JRLnXS1kMp72QsGsj4DIqzwcZKKtr2WyqFL BR6HBzgGtV9KmslHAmh9sAAU/6ELwXOJYDmu714g6RWIzF2VSfxy/GKV8u9F5VAy stIpNN+pNiO3FsSLMEfq/NajMVcXbPqJoDu61YLMKNr9FJ2Aw3MhwLQDyFs7/Bo= =fET8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KEAcA8HQ0eCGeEpdODV96PcjH0WnIbe0A--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54C17E8B.1060400>