Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 02:20:09 +0300 From: Yuri Pankov <yuri.pankov@gmail.com> To: d@delphij.net Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: openldap-sasl-client ports Message-ID: <20110127232009.GC63800@darklight.org.ru> In-Reply-To: <4D41F7B1.6050306@delphij.net> References: <20110127214453.GB63800@darklight.org.ru> <4D41F7B1.6050306@delphij.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 02:54:41PM -0800, Xin LI wrote:
> On 01/27/11 13:44, Yuri Pankov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Looks like dependency recording for openldap2{3,4}-sasl-client ports is
> > broken again (I tried to fix it in ports/135664). I can take a look at
>
> How do I reproduce this? (so I would be able to test before commit? Or
> it's someone else broken it?)
Sorry for not providing test case, which is really simple - just install
openldap24-client port with SASL option turned on and any port depending
on openldap-client (i.e. gnupg):
darklight.org.ru:yuri:~> pkg_info -rx gnupg
Information for gnupg-2.0.16_6:
Depends on:
Dependency: ca_root_nss-3.12.6
Dependency: curl-7.21.3
Dependency: pth-2.0.7
Dependency: libiconv-1.13.1_1
Dependency: gettext-0.18.1.1
Dependency: libgpg-error-1.10
Dependency: libassuan-2.0.1_1
Dependency: libksba-1.1.0
Dependency: libgcrypt-1.4.6
Dependency: dirmngr-1.1.0_5
The following is probably the reason:
@name openldap-sasl-client-2.4.23
@comment ORIGIN:net/openldap24-client
> > fixing it again, but the real question here is - do we really need them
> > now, when options are the same for -client and -server ports?
>
> I'm not sure if I understood what you mean -- do you mean that now that
> we have OPTIONS menu for both -client ports?
Nevermind the options part, I got the reason for having separate
-sasl-client ports wrong, I think.
> Speaking about the two different ports, I believe the real reason for
> having both is to make it easier to install binary packages (we build at
> FreeBSD cluster). Note that we have no preconfigured ports that uses
> them though.
>
> I do not personally use SASL'ed OpenLDAP but I am not really sure if
> it's Okay to just axe the package...
Sorry if I'm totally wrong here.. My solution would be simple - make
SASL option turned on by default and drop PKGSUFFIX as well as deleting
the slave -sasl ports (as I see no reason for treating client or server
compiled with SASL support differently, and I hope that someone could
shed some light on the topic).
If we are to keep the suffix, may be we could set the LATEST_LINK when
adding PKGSUFFIX instead of having separate port with different origin
confusing the dependency recording?
> Cheers,
> - --
> Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net> http://www.delphij.net/
> FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! Live free or die
Yuri
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110127232009.GC63800>