Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-04 Thread Henrik Hudson 
On Fri, 01 Dec 2017, Henrik Hudson wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Dec 2017, Henrik Hudson wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 01 Dec 2017, René Ladan wrote:
> > 
> > > Op 1 dec. 2017 19:06 schreef "Henrik Hudson" :
> > > 
> > > So, I must be missing something. I have a poudriere jail specific
> > > make.conf like this:
> > > 
> > > #
> > > #unset some options by default
> > > OPTIONS_UNSET= ALSA APIDOCS BONJOUR CUPS DEBUG DOCBOOK DOCS EXAMPLES 
> > > GNUTLS
> > > HTMLDOCS \
> > > PULSEAUDIO SOUND STATIC TESTS X11 XINERAMA XORG
> > > 
> > > #fetch arguments - set timeout
> > > FETCH_BEFORE_ARGS=-T 3600
> > > 
> > > #perl version
> > > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= perl5=5.26
> > > 
> > > #PHP version
> > > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= php=71
> > > 
> > > #MySQL version - use MariaDB
> > > WITH_MYSQL_VER=101m
> > > 
> > > #OpenSSL
> > > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= ssl=openssl
> > > 
> > > #PostgreSQL
> > > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= pgsql=10
> > > 
> > > #Python
> > > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.6 python2=2.7 python3=3.6
> > > 
> > > #use LDAP SASL support
> > > WANT_OPENLDAP_SASL=yes
> > > #
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Reading in Mk/Uses/python.mk it seems to state that if
> > > USE_PYTHON=distutils is set in a Makefile that a port will be built
> > > for both Python2 and Python3 defaults. However, except for
> > > setuptools, all my ports are only building py27 ports.
> > > 
> > > For example, the devel/awscli only builds py27-awscli and it has:
> > > 
> > > USE_PYTHON= autoplist distutils concurrent
> > > 
> > > I would think if anything, using my DEFAULT_VERSIONS, that it would
> > > only build the 3.6 version?
> > > 
> > > I think you can remove the Python line now, that should enable building
> > > both the  2.7 and 3.6 (?) versions.
> > 
> > That just seems to switch the "python" port to use 2.7 as its
> > symlink vs. 3.6. I'm still only getting 2.7 builds for the majority
> > of ports.
> > 
> > henrik
> 
> Okay, so in my poudriere -f list file or bulk builds if I do:
> devel/awscli@py36  
> 
> when calling bulk then it builds for the right version. So, I don't
> know if that's the way it's supposed to work, I'm missing something,
> or if it's supposed to be building both.

So, there was a bug in Uses/python.mk that ignored any
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= changes to python. This was fixed over the
weekend and it seems to be working as expected now.


henrik


> 
> 
> henrik
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > René
> > > 
> > > 
> > > henrik
> > > --
> > > Henrik Hudson
> > > li...@rhavenn.net
> > > -
> > > "God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF
> > > 
> > > ___
> > > 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"
> > > ___
> > > 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"
> > 
> > -- 
> > Henrik Hudson
> > li...@rhavenn.net
> > -
> > "God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF 
> > 
> > ___
> > 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"
> 
> -- 
> Henrik Hudson
> li...@rhavenn.net
> -
> "God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF 
> 

-- 
Henrik Hudson
li...@rhavenn.net
-
"God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF 

___
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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-03 Thread emilia 
> I had no idea that the handbook was still directing people straight to HEAD. 
> You're absolutely
> right, that should be changed. Unfortunately, directing people to an SVN path 
> is difficult, because
> the SVN URL changes every 3 months, and switching an SVN branch from one path 
> to another isn't
> completely trivial.
> 
> For binary package users, new installs always default to installing packages 
> from quarterly, but we
> could do more to urge port builders toward quarterly branches too.

Hey, I have been using portsnap to update my ports tree and had no idea that 
quarterly releases of
the ports tree exist.

Maybe portsnap could be adapted to use the quarterly release and have that 
enabled per default on
the -RELEASE branch?
(I do not see any mention of branches in the portsnap manpage, on 11.1-RELEASE)
___
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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-03 Thread Christoph Brinkhaus 
On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 09:47:20AM -0700, Adam Weinberger wrote:

Dear Adam,

first of all I thank you and all contributers. In my optinion things
are running as smooth as possible. One must be extreme optimistic to 
expect such a change to happen without any issues.

> > On 3 Dec, 2017, at 6:31, Eric Masson  wrote:
> > 
> > Is ports/head becoming the alter ego of src/head (possible breakages or
> > disruptive new features from time to time) ?
> 
> Categorically, yes, though major breakages are rare. Situations like this, 
> where a major new feature gets introduced and the FreeBSD developers and 
> community hunt down problems and solve them, is strictly the role of HEAD. 
> While of course we can make no *guarantees* in either branch, ports-secteam 
> works very hard to inspect everything that gets merged to quarterly.
> 
As far as I know it takes a little amount of time to have changes
merged to quarterly. This might be of interest in case of securtity
issues only.

> > If yes, this should be written down in the handbook (chapter on ports
> > still states ports/head for svn retrieval) and quarterly ports branches
> > should be publicized.
> 
> I had no idea that the handbook was still directing people straight to HEAD. 
> You're absolutely right, that should be changed. Unfortunately, directing 
> people to an SVN path is difficult, because the SVN URL changes every 3 
> months, 
> and switching an SVN branch from one path to another isn't completely trivial.
> 
> For binary package users, new installs always default to installing packages 
> from quarterly, but we could do more to urge port builders toward quarterly 
> branches too.
> 
I think the situation is good as it is now. Newcommers are and have
been encouraged to use packages first. With the introduction of falvors 
more users might be happy with packages.
Everything is well documented. With poudriere or synth there is no
effect on the host if the build fails just because some unlucky
situation. I think for most useres there is no need to rebuild the
ports day by day.

Thank you and all the others for all your effort! 
And whatever you will do, someone will volunteer to complain;-).

Kind regards,
Christoph
___
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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-03 Thread Adam Weinberger 
> On 3 Dec, 2017, at 6:31, Eric Masson  wrote:
> 
> Is ports/head becoming the alter ego of src/head (possible breakages or
> disruptive new features from time to time) ?

Categorically, yes, though major breakages are rare. Situations like this, 
where a major new feature gets introduced and the FreeBSD developers and 
community hunt down problems and solve them, is strictly the role of HEAD. 
While of course we can make no *guarantees* in either branch, ports-secteam 
works very hard to inspect everything that gets merged to quarterly.

> If yes, this should be written down in the handbook (chapter on ports
> still states ports/head for svn retrieval) and quarterly ports branches
> should be publicized.

I had no idea that the handbook was still directing people straight to HEAD. 
You're absolutely right, that should be changed. Unfortunately, directing 
people to an SVN path is difficult, because the SVN URL changes every 3 months, 
and switching an SVN branch from one path to another isn't completely trivial.

For binary package users, new installs always default to installing packages 
from quarterly, but we could do more to urge port builders toward quarterly 
branches too.

# 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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-03 Thread Eric Masson 
Adam Weinberger  writes:

Hi Adam,

> 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.

For starters, the following is not intended to troll anyone.

FLAVORS mechanism seems to be a quite nice tool to improve ports, but
the landing in ports/head raises few questions.

Is ports/head becoming the alter ego of src/head (possible breakages or
disruptive new features from time to time) ?

If yes, this should be written down in the handbook (chapter on ports
still states ports/head for svn retrieval) and quarterly ports branches
should be publicized.

I've just switched to 2017Q4 on my main 11-STABLE box by digging in
various ports docs after I've read this very post I'm answering to.

I thus got rid of ports/head FLAVORS related issues (portmaster is my
tool of choice as poudriere seems a bit overkill for my needs).

Thanks to all involved.

Éric Masson

-- 
 Cela m'a même déjà valu quelques discussions animés avec mes paires
 -+- FC in  : Tête à tête ou tête à queue ? -+-
___
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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-02 Thread Adam Weinberger 
> On 2 Dec, 2017, at 5:55, Christian Ullrich  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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-02 Thread Christian Ullrich 

* 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.


--
Christian
___
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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-01 Thread Henrik Hudson 
On Fri, 01 Dec 2017, Henrik Hudson wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Dec 2017, René Ladan wrote:
> 
> > Op 1 dec. 2017 19:06 schreef "Henrik Hudson" :
> > 
> > So, I must be missing something. I have a poudriere jail specific
> > make.conf like this:
> > 
> > #
> > #unset some options by default
> > OPTIONS_UNSET= ALSA APIDOCS BONJOUR CUPS DEBUG DOCBOOK DOCS EXAMPLES GNUTLS
> > HTMLDOCS \
> > PULSEAUDIO SOUND STATIC TESTS X11 XINERAMA XORG
> > 
> > #fetch arguments - set timeout
> > FETCH_BEFORE_ARGS=-T 3600
> > 
> > #perl version
> > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= perl5=5.26
> > 
> > #PHP version
> > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= php=71
> > 
> > #MySQL version - use MariaDB
> > WITH_MYSQL_VER=101m
> > 
> > #OpenSSL
> > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= ssl=openssl
> > 
> > #PostgreSQL
> > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= pgsql=10
> > 
> > #Python
> > DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.6 python2=2.7 python3=3.6
> > 
> > #use LDAP SASL support
> > WANT_OPENLDAP_SASL=yes
> > #
> > 
> > 
> > Reading in Mk/Uses/python.mk it seems to state that if
> > USE_PYTHON=distutils is set in a Makefile that a port will be built
> > for both Python2 and Python3 defaults. However, except for
> > setuptools, all my ports are only building py27 ports.
> > 
> > For example, the devel/awscli only builds py27-awscli and it has:
> > 
> > USE_PYTHON= autoplist distutils concurrent
> > 
> > I would think if anything, using my DEFAULT_VERSIONS, that it would
> > only build the 3.6 version?
> > 
> > I think you can remove the Python line now, that should enable building
> > both the  2.7 and 3.6 (?) versions.
> 
> That just seems to switch the "python" port to use 2.7 as its
> symlink vs. 3.6. I'm still only getting 2.7 builds for the majority
> of ports.
> 
> henrik

Okay, so in my poudriere -f list file or bulk builds if I do:
devel/awscli@py36  

when calling bulk then it builds for the right version. So, I don't
know if that's the way it's supposed to work, I'm missing something,
or if it's supposed to be building both.


henrik
> 
> 
> > 
> > René
> > 
> > 
> > henrik
> > --
> > Henrik Hudson
> > li...@rhavenn.net
> > -
> > "God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF
> > 
> > ___
> > 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"
> > ___
> > 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"
> 
> -- 
> Henrik Hudson
> li...@rhavenn.net
> -
> "God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF 
> 
> ___
> 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"

-- 
Henrik Hudson
li...@rhavenn.net
-
"God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF 

___
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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-01 Thread Henrik Hudson 
On Fri, 01 Dec 2017, René Ladan wrote:

> Op 1 dec. 2017 19:06 schreef "Henrik Hudson" :
> 
> So, I must be missing something. I have a poudriere jail specific
> make.conf like this:
> 
> #
> #unset some options by default
> OPTIONS_UNSET= ALSA APIDOCS BONJOUR CUPS DEBUG DOCBOOK DOCS EXAMPLES GNUTLS
> HTMLDOCS \
> PULSEAUDIO SOUND STATIC TESTS X11 XINERAMA XORG
> 
> #fetch arguments - set timeout
> FETCH_BEFORE_ARGS=-T 3600
> 
> #perl version
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= perl5=5.26
> 
> #PHP version
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= php=71
> 
> #MySQL version - use MariaDB
> WITH_MYSQL_VER=101m
> 
> #OpenSSL
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= ssl=openssl
> 
> #PostgreSQL
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= pgsql=10
> 
> #Python
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.6 python2=2.7 python3=3.6
> 
> #use LDAP SASL support
> WANT_OPENLDAP_SASL=yes
> #
> 
> 
> Reading in Mk/Uses/python.mk it seems to state that if
> USE_PYTHON=distutils is set in a Makefile that a port will be built
> for both Python2 and Python3 defaults. However, except for
> setuptools, all my ports are only building py27 ports.
> 
> For example, the devel/awscli only builds py27-awscli and it has:
> 
> USE_PYTHON= autoplist distutils concurrent
> 
> I would think if anything, using my DEFAULT_VERSIONS, that it would
> only build the 3.6 version?
> 
> I think you can remove the Python line now, that should enable building
> both the  2.7 and 3.6 (?) versions.

That just seems to switch the "python" port to use 2.7 as its
symlink vs. 3.6. I'm still only getting 2.7 builds for the majority
of ports.

henrik


> 
> René
> 
> 
> henrik
> --
> Henrik Hudson
> li...@rhavenn.net
> -
> "God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF
> 
> ___
> 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"
> ___
> 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"

-- 
Henrik Hudson
li...@rhavenn.net
-
"God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF 

___
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"

Re: poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-01 Thread René Ladan 
Op 1 dec. 2017 19:06 schreef "Henrik Hudson" :

So, I must be missing something. I have a poudriere jail specific
make.conf like this:

#
#unset some options by default
OPTIONS_UNSET= ALSA APIDOCS BONJOUR CUPS DEBUG DOCBOOK DOCS EXAMPLES GNUTLS
HTMLDOCS \
PULSEAUDIO SOUND STATIC TESTS X11 XINERAMA XORG

#fetch arguments - set timeout
FETCH_BEFORE_ARGS=-T 3600

#perl version
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= perl5=5.26

#PHP version
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= php=71

#MySQL version - use MariaDB
WITH_MYSQL_VER=101m

#OpenSSL
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= ssl=openssl

#PostgreSQL
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= pgsql=10

#Python
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.6 python2=2.7 python3=3.6

#use LDAP SASL support
WANT_OPENLDAP_SASL=yes
#


Reading in Mk/Uses/python.mk it seems to state that if
USE_PYTHON=distutils is set in a Makefile that a port will be built
for both Python2 and Python3 defaults. However, except for
setuptools, all my ports are only building py27 ports.

For example, the devel/awscli only builds py27-awscli and it has:

USE_PYTHON= autoplist distutils concurrent

I would think if anything, using my DEFAULT_VERSIONS, that it would
only build the 3.6 version?

I think you can remove the Python line now, that should enable building
both the  2.7 and 3.6 (?) versions.

René


henrik
--
Henrik Hudson
li...@rhavenn.net
-
"God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF

___
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"
___
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"

poudriere, python ports, and flavors oh my?

2017-12-01 Thread Henrik Hudson 
So, I must be missing something. I have a poudriere jail specific
make.conf like this:

#
#unset some options by default
OPTIONS_UNSET= ALSA APIDOCS BONJOUR CUPS DEBUG DOCBOOK DOCS EXAMPLES GNUTLS 
HTMLDOCS \
PULSEAUDIO SOUND STATIC TESTS X11 XINERAMA XORG

#fetch arguments - set timeout
FETCH_BEFORE_ARGS=-T 3600

#perl version
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= perl5=5.26

#PHP version
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= php=71

#MySQL version - use MariaDB
WITH_MYSQL_VER=101m

#OpenSSL
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= ssl=openssl

#PostgreSQL
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= pgsql=10

#Python
DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.6 python2=2.7 python3=3.6

#use LDAP SASL support
WANT_OPENLDAP_SASL=yes
#


Reading in Mk/Uses/python.mk it seems to state that if
USE_PYTHON=distutils is set in a Makefile that a port will be built
for both Python2 and Python3 defaults. However, except for
setuptools, all my ports are only building py27 ports.

For example, the devel/awscli only builds py27-awscli and it has:

USE_PYTHON= autoplist distutils concurrent

I would think if anything, using my DEFAULT_VERSIONS, that it would
only build the 3.6 version?

henrik
-- 
Henrik Hudson
li...@rhavenn.net
-
"God, root, what is difference?" Pitr; UF 

___
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"