From nobody Thu Oct 28 02:33:51 2021 X-Original-To: dev-commits-ports-main@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40F7E183535F; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 02:33:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4HfqPW1NLLz3mfC; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 02:33:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1635388431; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=sSd/tZ0ZAlIWUaypSWAsV+d53GYhEQqF6MfKP4gCk00=; b=PcsAamGZlxDR5AJ55aogl7PFS0X0BAiIe7hQ+5aGAlGk+dUCjXcmx8lL3EEzlt9ciiLOWE 1w+El+dEMuNYiUk+iNUybvMpY2V2tcKSEE+578RjO2duKwHaIw6I9M0RgHLs2P5YlZaQI7 lDlOx3XaXBO5mF7PwJqSRJWmEavxTCwvmHFw4L3SPpg+Ss6LDfqLJ/4+KC9CvFToF8IMF2 KQXbV43qfZWmnMJZvdDZKtIu/kg5aqQ9sOFsINELkl2R7fuWjmIycQS9WIe4ChBlRKkq9t O0/jE+WOYt7PMwLneg7ikD+iwkA0arALZ4rZfm/fsLttIHB3KLgOpKfhr67PWg== Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 1706A10314; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 02:33:51 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 02:33:51 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Stefan Esser Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 00e15405660f - main - textproc/html2text: Update CONFLICTS Message-ID: References: <202110270841.19R8fLH2046856@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <7e5125f5-2e8d-5be7-3b0c-bb4401a3c58d@freebsd.org> List-Id: Commits to the main branch of the FreeBSD ports repository List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/dev-commits-ports-main List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7e5125f5-2e8d-5be7-3b0c-bb4401a3c58d@freebsd.org> ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1635388431; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=sSd/tZ0ZAlIWUaypSWAsV+d53GYhEQqF6MfKP4gCk00=; b=difeiBsiLgJi13ZD1a1B71gCTQ3ayJ4W87U5uLRNWdO2jucyc4NvunACgcA5GHYXwz3Aeo DkrF7jaeIxi/NBM47DAVWDvDy7xlp1KSgkeRdB0jN4j9dVbpUv+99ijY0X2mKuZW+PG8s3 jFzZTW1uUhNCFbBDaCaHbKNcHPVKnYWSzF08styzsp9QvvZhdy6INdS3f+Vnk3Y6GE+jjH ezQyySplJr+xnXJIapuI9b9JncUEI6myoebNWhFFHJkhfgxvPOK3cIZoeq0nKnuK2OKkeA /xn0Zcf+f49TH2nfO0h9BJ3P8rpC9LkIrwULH02C6lJsRx0zu6s8uHnzpiZ6Tw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1635388431; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Z3ef0qYWzMLgju4at7HxhQTkmKPZRKgwEre3lpYBrBu7Kx8ZJh/o03yRsEmxMe0UCig+Mv dJiSyZutjf23evy8jfcHmsQ7HKLfIYLqgxJHptAFetk0GxlwwkQOOOuwbjI6mlMm4kNhbh jwnFdeau1PmyGS4Obzg/KOy1NxukiUmpFQRQhYWba8pQs82iRK90eJeVEwSKA99gMOeIaL t4ABUqUp/gq2RxzhGbDAx2CECWhICP2DMZ48/UHTVawZzb61hFstYgRJM2HmB8e8Gqcw63 DNpH3mL2twXiEAhz/DZ5ePEt1qu7UJhNRtaMorguwnphLtsRblCcu6TCQVRjKg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 08:25:13PM +0200, Stefan Esser wrote: > Am 27.10.21 um 11:00 schrieb Alexey Dokuchaev: > >> ... > >> -CONFLICTS= py27-html2text-[0-9]* > >> +CONFLICTS= py*-html2text-[0-9]* > > > > I recal, last time I've tried to specify a conflict without the -[0-9]* > > suffix and it worked as expected. Are those really necessary in default > > "all versions" case? > > And quite a few CONFLICTS specifications should actually be > CONFLICTS_INSTALL. But it takes a lot of work to check whether there > really is a build conflict for each of the combinations... I'm not sure if CONFLICTS alone is justified, and why can't we always use correct CONFLICTS_$TYPE. Checking if CONFLICTS should really be CONFLICTS_INSTALL could be automated, or so it seems at least for cases when prerequisite are met, by comparing pkg-plists of ports in question. CONFLICTS_BUILD are tougher; whenever I added one, it was as a result of stumbling across local build problem and wondering why it does not happen on the cluster, i.e. in pristine environment. Overall, many good points Stefan, nice write up. So that even if you won't pick up on this task, someone might now that you've made it less of an uncharted territory. ./danfe