Re: Prevent MacPorts editing .bash_profile over and over again...

2017-03-21 Thread Brandon Allbery 
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Brandon Allbery 
wrote:

> vim $(port logfile thePort)
>

...and the port you installed will usually get expanded with .
(bash/zsh, in default emacs mode) so you don't even need to type that :)

-- 
brandon s allbery kf8nh   sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com  ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net

Re: Prevent MacPorts editing .bash_profile over and over again...

2017-03-21 Thread Brandon Allbery 
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Dave Horsfall  wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Mar 2017, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> > Never assume people will read instructions. How often do we get people
> > who cut and paste the boilerplate at the end of a failed build that
> > tells them to check the build log, and mail it here asking what they
> > should do?
>
> Which reminds me: would it be possible to symlink to the log file from
> somewhere in /tmp?  It's a real PITA doing a C with a path that wraps
> lines...  Yes, I'm an old fogey, and use 80 columns...
>

vim $(port logfile thePort)

-- 
brandon s allbery kf8nh   sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com  ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net

Re: Prevent MacPorts editing .bash_profile over and over again...

2017-03-21 Thread Dave Horsfall 
On Tue, 21 Mar 2017, Brandon Allbery wrote:

> Never assume people will read instructions. How often do we get people 
> who cut and paste the boilerplate at the end of a failed build that 
> tells them to check the build log, and mail it here asking what they 
> should do?

Which reminds me: would it be possible to symlink to the log file from 
somewhere in /tmp?  It's a real PITA doing a C with a path that wraps 
lines...  Yes, I'm an old fogey, and use 80 columns...

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

Re: all compilers blacklisted or unavailable

2017-03-21 Thread Brandon Allbery 
IIRC there's also an edge case when something tries to check the compiler
in a fetch step or w/e and the information doesn't exist yet, so all
compilers are "blacklisted" because there are no compilers defined yet,
while the code printing that assumes the compiler list is empty because
blacklisting removed all of them? And I think another if something tries to
look up Xcode-specific information but the xcode portgroup hasn't been
initialized?

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Daniel J. Luke  wrote:

> On Mar 21, 2017, at 5:03 PM, Jan Stary  wrote:
> > Looking at the output of port -v -d install sox:
> >
> > DEBUG: compiler clang 77 blacklisted because it matches {clang < 503}
> > DEBUG: compiler clang 77 blacklisted because it matches {clang < 500}
> > DEBUG: compiler clang 77 blacklisted because it matches {clang < 500}
> > Warning: All compilers are either blacklisted or unavailable; defaulting
> to first fallback option
> > Warning: All compilers are either blacklisted or unavailable; defaulting
> to first fallback option
> >
> > That does not look like a specific reason why clang fails to build sox
> properly.
>
> you trimmed the relevant information - that's almost certainly coming from
> a port that sox requires and not sox itself.
>
> Most of the ports that use compiler blacklist have a comment in the
> portfile explaining why (most people don't care, though ;-) ).
>
> --
> Daniel J. Luke
>
>
>
>


-- 
brandon s allbery kf8nh   sine nomine associates
allber...@gmail.com  ballb...@sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonadhttp://sinenomine.net

Re: all compilers blacklisted or unavailable

2017-03-21 Thread Jan Stary 
On Mar 21 14:43:12, allber...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 4:37 AM, Jan Stary  wrote:
> 
> > Why are they unavailable? The gcc and clang from Xcode work just fine.
> 
> 
> "Works for random stuff I tried it on" does not guarantee it doesn't throw
> spurious errors or even produce broken programs in specific cases (which is
> to say, most compilers have bugs, but you only run into them in certain
> cases). Compilers get blacklisted for specific ports when they have been
> found to be incapable of building that port properly.

I don't doubt that compilers throw errors or even produce broken code.
But which specific compilers are blacklisted for which specific reasons
when building sox, specifically? I don't see anything compiler-related
in the sox's Portfile.

Looking at the output of port -v -d install sox:

DEBUG: compiler clang 77 blacklisted because it matches {clang < 503}
DEBUG: compiler clang 77 blacklisted because it matches {clang < 500}
DEBUG: compiler clang 77 blacklisted because it matches {clang < 500}
Warning: All compilers are either blacklisted or unavailable; defaulting to 
first fallback option
Warning: All compilers are either blacklisted or unavailable; defaulting to 
first fallback option

That does not look like a specific reason why clang fails to build sox properly.
Does that mean clang < 500 (as installed by Xcode 3.2.6) is blacklisted as such,
for building any port?

Even if so, why are "all compilers blacklisted" after clang has been ruled out?

Jan

Re: Prevent MacPorts editing .bash_profile over and over again...

2017-03-21 Thread Daniel J. Luke 
On Mar 21, 2017, at 9:30 AM, Jan Stary  wrote:
> I appreciate you concern about being spammed with trivia.
> But it's one line in ~/.profile, which is equally trivial.

While I agree with you in principle (see list archives where I disagreed with 
adding this to the installer way back when it was first introduced) - Ryan is 
right that we used to get lots of support requests where people apparently 
weren't capable of reading the instructions and updating their $PATH themselves.

Our actual experience around this issue tells us that it's worse to not try to 
set $PATH in the installer.

> I find mangling the user's shell configuration worse:
> someone who uses macports to install software
> is capable of editing one line in their config if told so.

users who are smart enough to edit their configs are also smart enough to 
install from source (where you don't have this issue at all).

-- 
Daniel J. Luke

all compilers blacklisted or unavailable

2017-03-21 Thread Jan Stary 
This is MacPorts 2.4.1 on MacOSX 10.6.8.
A build of audio/sox starts with the following warning:

$ sudo port install -d sox
Warning: All compilers are either blacklisted or unavailable; defaulting to 
first fallback option
Warning: All compilers are either blacklisted or unavailable; defaulting to 
first fallback option
--->  Computing dependencies for sox
--->  Fetching archive for sox
--->  Attempting to fetch sox-14.4.2_0.darwin_10.x86_64.tbz2 from 
https://packages.macports.org/sox
--->  Attempting to fetch sox-14.4.2_0.darwin_10.x86_64.tbz2 from 
http://nue.de.packages.macports.org/sox
--->  Attempting to fetch sox-14.4.2_0.darwin_10.x86_64.tbz2 from 
http://lil.fr.packages.macports.org/sox
--->  Fetching distfiles for sox
--->  Verifying checksums for sox
--->  Extracting sox
--->  Applying patches to sox
--->  Configuring sox
--->  Building sox
--->  Staging sox into destroot
--->  Installing sox @14.4.2_0
--->  Activating sox @14.4.2_0
--->  Cleaning sox
--->  Updating database of binaries
--->  Scanning binaries for linking errors
--->  No broken files found.

What "all compilers" are those? (I have Xcode 3.2.6)
Why are they blacklisted? Who blacklisted them?
Why are they unavailable? The gcc and clang from Xcode work just fine.
How do I get port(1) to print all this for me if -d doesn't?
WHy is the message printed twice?

Jan