freebsd-ports Digest, Vol 930, Issue 4

[Guido Falsi]

On 25/03/21 15:43, Adriaan de Groot wrote:
> On Thursday, 25 March 2021 13:00:02 CET freebsd-ports-request at freebsd.org
> wrote:
>> The idea is to try to have www/qt5-webengine fixed before the expiration
>> time, saving with it a bunch of innocent ports depending on it, correct?
> 
> In the sense of "have one guy take a stab at it over the weekend because
> multi-billion-dollar companies can't be arsed", yes. I'm not sure what the
> situation over in Linux-land is.
> 

And I'm really grateful to you for your work on this.

Anyway we do have some kind of plan and I also read (I think it was you) 
that a brute force approach of just grabbing the output of the python 
parts and forcing them in the build could work. While not elegant maybe 
it can bring results in a shorter time if things get tight.

Unluckily, notwithstanding me being involved with some python ports, I 
have actually very little knowledge of python, so I don't think I can 
help much,

> [ade]
> 
> PS1. I'm going to primarily blame Google; the Qt Company, though, is far from
> blameless in its maintainence of WebEngine (or lack thereof). I have hope for
> TurtleBrowser, but they are also kind of waiting on me for a breakthrough on
> the Python3 front.
> 

The whole python27 situation is really an horrible mess, and many are to 
blame, including big tech. This also demonstrates that just having money 
to throw at a problem is no warranty of it being solved (or the money 
actually being thrown).


> PS2. Works-in-progress are the branches *webengine-python3* (old, but does
> complete an entire build that then doesn't actually **work**) and *webengine-
> logpy27* (new, currently more hacky, doesn't build) in the https://github.com/
> freebsd/freebsd-ports-kde.git ports repo.
> 

Will try to take a look.

-- 
Guido Falsi <mad at madpilot.net>