From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org  Sat Apr 17 12:16:58 2021
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
 by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0125D4007
 for <freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org>;
 Sat, 17 Apr 2021 12:16:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org)
Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FMsWt4bw4z4dd9
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 17 Apr 2021 12:16:58 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org)
Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix)
 id 9C4915D3F92; Sat, 17 Apr 2021 12:16:58 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
 by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C1565D4006
 for <ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org>; Sat, 17 Apr 2021 12:16:58 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org)
Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FMsWt48pqz4dk4
 for <ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 17 Apr 2021 12:16:58 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org)
Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.94 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <pi@freebsd.org>)
 id 1lXjsb-0005cv-SK; Sat, 17 Apr 2021 14:16:53 +0200
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 14:16:53 +0200
From: Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org>
To: Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@digiware.nl>
Cc: "ports@freebsd.org" <ports@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Boost versions
Message-ID: <YHrRtR8zE7uMYgo8@home.opsec.eu>
References: <f6a433e3-6812-7acf-db06-6a0317d19e38@withagen.nl>
 <3e4d9c90-7bfd-7a63-de32-525e459dad7c@digiware.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3e4d9c90-7bfd-7a63-de32-525e459dad7c@digiware.nl>
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4FMsWt48pqz4dk4
X-Spamd-Bar: ----
Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org;
	none
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00];
	 REPLY(-4.00)[]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 12:16:58 -0000

Hi!

> > > > Ceph has moved to Boost 1.75, so now it is build with the project.
> > > > Which is of course a pity.
[...]
> > > It looks like a major undertaking!

> Why is that?
> If I look at what is in phabricator, the largest part is diffs on the
> plist?

Getting the port to build is one thing.

> There used to be several versions of Boost in parallel.

Yes. I have no idea how easy that would be.

The bigger part is, as you described:

> So perhaps that is the best way to avoid having to deal with ABI/API
> breakage...
> After that it is up to the maintainers of the dependant packages to
> update their package and start using boost-1.75.

There is the implicit assumption that a patch that updates
boost for all the dependent ports should also provide fixes
if those ports fail to build after the update. That is
the major task.

> Or am I too simple in thinking this?

No.

The normal way would be to provide the patch, testbuild all the
depends, list the broken ports in the PR and then a small group of
folks can try to fix them one by one.

-- 
pi@opsec.eu            +49 171 3101372                    Now what ?