Why does security/amavisd-new depend on db3?

Michael C. Shultz ringworm01 at gmail.com
Tue Nov 15 14:30:09 PST 2005

On Tuesday 15 November 2005 14:20, Craig Boston wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 01:42:13PM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
> > God this is getting ugly.  If what your saying is true, and I have no
> > doubt that it is, then manuially installing port
> >
> > databases/p5-Berkeley
> >
> > by doing this:
> >
> > make install clean WITH_BDB_VER=42 is goint to stil cause
> > security/amavisd-new to get its +CONTENTS file wrong
> > if it is installed later.  This is not good behavior your describing.
> Yes, that is exactly what will happen.  Unless either amavisd-new is
> installed with the same options, or make.conf is used (either globally
> or with the CURDIR trick), it will get registered wrong.  Even when
> building manually.  The same problem applies to binary packages built
> with non-standard settings.
> Unfortunately it seems to be an artifact of the way that the ports
> Makefile magic works, and doesn't look easy to solve.
> > Maybe the ports people are trying to force everyone to use OPTIONS
> > and render WITH switches on the command line as no longer feasable?
> I'm not so sure this is a recent development...  IMO it seems that
> OPTIONS was partially devised as a way to avoid this kind of brokenness.
> > BTW your knowledge of the ports infrastructure is impressive, are you on
> > the ports team by any chance?
> No, I just maintain a couple here and there.  I've done some nasty
> bsd.port.mk tricks before though, such as setting up hooks to install to
> a nonstandard prefix and using stow to maintain a symlink tree in
> /usr/local (for a hybrid flash memory/HDD system that didn't always have
> the HDD mounted).
> Also, a few years back I wrote a C++ program that's halfway between
> portupgrade and the package cluster build scripts.  The idea was to use
> a cluster to build packages in parallel, but after a cvsup to only
> rebuild ones that had changed.  The code was ugly and it never quite
> worked 100% right, so I eventually stopped using it, but gained a lot of
> experience with port and package dependencies.

Ha, I've been toying with the same idea for portmanager, that is to use other 
computer's on one's network to help with the building of ports.  I plan to 
test the idea next summer.  Anyways I've learned much from you, thanks
for taking the time to explain things!


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list