[HEADSUP] Upcoming change in dependency registration

[Bryan Drewery]

On 1/22/2015 2:24 PM, Chris H wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 19:09:13 +0100 Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at FreeBSD.org> wrote
> 
>> Hi all
>>
>> Some changes are coming to the ports, the diff is rather simple, but the
>> 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-registration/
>>
>> 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 provides and
>> depend correctly on "smart dep" aka "perl5>=5.18.2_3<5.20"
>>
>> This change is being exp-run and will be committed as soon as it is stable
>> 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).
> 
> I'm still reading the proposed changes. :)
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --Chris
> 

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.

-- 
Regards,
Bryan Drewery

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20150122/13a4469f/attachment.sig>