> On 2 Dec, 2017, at 5:55, Christian Ullrich <ch...@chrullrich.net> wrote: > > * Henrik Hudson wrote: > >> So, I must be missing something. I have a poudriere jail specific >> make.conf like this: > >> #Python >> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.6 python2=2.7 python3=3.6 > > Same here, and this happens: > > # cat /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/py3-make.conf > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.6 > # poudriere version > 3.2.2 > # poudriere testport -j stable -z py3 databases/py-psycopg2 > [...] > [00:00:02] Building 2 packages using 2 builders > [00:00:02] Starting/Cloning builders > [00:00:02] Hit CTRL+t at any time to see build progress and stats > [00:00:02] [01] [00:00:00] Building lang/python27 | python27-2.7.14_1 > [00:00:02] [01] [00:00:00] Finished lang/python27 | python27-2.7.14_1: > Ignored: Blacklisted > [00:00:02] [01] [00:00:00] Skipping devel/py-setuptools@py27 | > py27-setuptools-36.5.0: Dependent port lang/python27 | python27-2.7.14_1 > ignored > [00:00:02] Stopping 2 builders > [00:00:03] Error: Depends failed to build > [00:00:03] Failed ports: > [00:00:03] Skipped ports: devel/py-setuptools@py27 > [00:00:03] Cleaning up > [00:00:03] Unmounting file systems > > lang/python27 is blacklisted for set py3 to prevent exactly this kind of > disaster. If I remove it from the blacklist, still _only_ py27-flavored > packages are built. > > This looks like the introduction of flavors disconnected the Python ports > from DEFAULT_VERSIONS. > > What is the purpose behind this, and how do I get poudriere to build > py36-flavored packages now _without_ adding "@py36" to each and every Python > port in the list I feed to bulk? > > There is the claim in UPDATING that "People using Poudriere 3.2+ [...] do not > have to do anything." Unless, it appears, they use any Python version other > than 2.7, since adding flavor suffixes to port lists is not "not anything". > > My current setup is to have two sets, one with default 2.7, the other with > default 3.6, resulting in two separate pkg repos, and when I need a Python > 3.6 package, I take it from that repo. It may be that this method is now > obsolete, but I would have expected this to be mentioned somewhere.
It's a bug, and it's being worked on. amdmi3 submitted https://reviews.freebsd.org/D13326 and it's awaiting commit. If you'd like to test the patch and confirm that it fixes the problem that'd be helpful. Given that most people don't participate and test patches while they're in review, you have to expect that some bugs will only surface when it lands in HEAD. This is precisely why we have quarterly branches, and why we recommend that most people stay on quarterly. # Adam -- Adam Weinberger ad...@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
