Opinion on cross-port OPTIONS CONFLICTS

[Josh Paetzel]

On Friday 21 December 2007 07:50:59 pm Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 04:13:46PM -0600, Josh Paetzel wrote:
> > On Friday 21 December 2007 03:43:19 pm Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 03:24:20PM -0600, Josh Paetzel wrote:
> > > > I've recently run across some brokeness in ports that would be
> > > > relatively trivial to deal with if one port had a way to know about
> > > > the OPTIONS another port was compiled with.
> > >
> > > I have been working on it a not-so-long-time-ago and found that
> > > this could be the best way:
> > >
> > > [/var/db/ports/arts] edwin at k7>cat options
> > > # This file is auto-generated by 'make config'.
> > > # No user-servicable parts inside!
> > > # Options for arts-1.5.1_1,1
> > > _OPTIONS_READ=arts-1.5.1_1,1
> > > WITHOUT_ESD=true
> > > WITHOUT_NAS=true
> > >
> > > [/var/db/ports/arts] edwin at k7>eval `cat options | grep -v "^\#" | sed
> > > -e 's/^/arts_/'`
> > >
> > > [/var/db/ports/arts] edwin at k7>echo $arts_WITHOUT_NAS
> > > true
> > >
> > >
> > > I hadn't put it in a PR yet because it has some synchronity issues:
> > >
> > > - It only works for ports already installed.
> > > - It doesn't work for ports which are being installed by this port.
> > > - No idea how to do this for packages build on ye olde cluster.
> > >
> > > But the idea is there:
> > >
> > >     OPTIONS_DEPENDS=	arts
> > >     .include <bsd.port.pre.mk>
> > >     .if !defined arts_WITH_NAS
> > >     BROKEN=		Please build audio/arts first before building this port.
> > >     .fi
> > >     .if ${arts_WITH_NAS} = "true"
> > >     BROKEN=		This port can't work with audio/arts enabled with NAS
> > > support .fi
> > >
> > > Edwin
> >
> > It also doesn't work if someone runs make rmconfig, or make config again
> > and changes things after the port is installed.
> >
> > It probably doesn't work if a package was used to install either.
>
> Create a slave port audio/arts-withoutnas and let it depends on
> that one.
>
> Edwin

I don't think that's a scalable solution.  It would create an explosion of 
ports in the already taxed tree, as well as confusion as to which port to 
install among the users.

-- 
Thanks,

Josh Paetzel

PGP: 8A48 EF36 5E9F 4EDA 5A8C 11B4 26F9 01F1 27AF AECB
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20071222/e2e7ad3e/attachment.pgp