Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:12:37 +0200
From:      Anton Berezin <tobez@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Aaron Dalton <aaron@daltons.ca>
Cc:        freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: ports/87590: Update Port: devel/p5-AI-Pathfinding-AStar 0.03 -> 0.04
Message-ID:  <20051018141237.GF77678@heechee.tobez.org>
In-Reply-To: <435501D5.4010800@daltons.ca>
References:  <200510180916.j9I9GR35024594@freefall.freebsd.org> <435501D5.4010800@daltons.ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 08:08:21AM -0600, Aaron Dalton wrote:
> Anton Berezin wrote:
> >Synopsis: Update Port: devel/p5-AI-Pathfinding-AStar 0.03 -> 0.04
> >
> >State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
> >State-Changed-By: tobez
> >State-Changed-When: Tue Oct 18 11:15:24 CEST 2005
> >State-Changed-Why: 
> >Have you tried to test this module without either Heap::Simple::Perl or
> >Heap::Simple::XS installed?
> >
> >To rephrase - it is unusable if you just install this port on a fresh
> >machine.
> >
> >http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=87590
> 
> No, because Heap::Simple doesn't function without ::XS or ::Perl.  That 
> is clearly (I believe) announced in pkg_msg.  I'm not sure what other 
> approach to take.  Any ideas would be warmly welcomed.

One way would be to actually install one of those as a dependency, so
that we get a useful port out of the box.  Which one, I am not sure.  On
the one hand, ::Perl is more portable.  On the other hand, ::XS is
faster and we can basically guarantee that a C compiler is there and
that the module works.  So, I would probably go for ::XS as a dependency
of p5-Heap-Simple, if that's alright with you?

\Anton.
-- 
An undefined problem has an infinite number of solutions.
-- Robert A. Humphrey



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051018141237.GF77678>