Issues with portmaster

[Doug Barton]

Alexey Shuvaev wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:57:41AM +0200, Alex Dupre wrote:
>> Alexey Shuvaev ha scritto:
>>> It seems I don't understand something here. Can someone explain why
>>> jdk ports need to set BUILD_DEPENDS on diablo-jdk15 unconditionally?
>> (nearly) every JDK port needs an already usable/installed JDK to  
>> bootstrap the compilation. This is the reason of the BUILD_DEPENDS on  
>> javac that you cannot remove. But the port providing the javac binary  
>                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> could not be the diablo-jdk.
>>
> Mmmm... why not???
> In a nutshell, from the user point of view the reason to set BUILD_DEPENDS is
> to ensure that some port (java here) is installed prior to build.
> However, if the port checks against installed java in a more complicated manner
> than BUILD_DEPENDS mechanism can provide, I see no reason to set
> BUILD_DEPENDS to something just for its own sake.
> And from the build cluster point of view, the port will be built in a clean
> environment, so port will not detect any installed java and will set
> BUILD_DEPENDS *conditionally* (.if !defiend(BOOTSTRAPJDKDIR)).
> 
> I have a feeling that the way BUILD_DEPENDS is set now is overkill, and
> one can put it under .if !defined(BOOTSTRAPJDKDIR) without any functional
> change. Of course, the Right Way To Do This would be to set the whole
> correct BUILD_DEPENDS line based on detected java. Maybe this is even not
> so complicated. Or I miss something?

Thanks for the discussion on this. Since I don't use java I'm relying 
an the users here. Hopefully glewis can weigh in at some point.

Doug

-- 

     This .signature sanitized for your protection