On 5/29/2012 11:25 AM, Olli Hauer wrote:
> On 2012-05-29 19:06, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 5/29/2012 4:00 AM, Mel Flynn wrote:
>>> On 29-5-2012 7:23, Doug Barton wrote:
>>>> On 5/21/2012 9:40 AM, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
>>>>> I think that the best will be to not have any default "php5" port and
>>>>> just use php52, php53, php54, php5X, php60... as we have apache20,
>>>>> apache22, apache24, or mysql50-server, mysql51-server, mysql55-server.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no default apache2 or mysql5-server, so there is no confusion
>>>>> what is / what will be installed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then it can be choosed in make.conf what version will be used as
>>>>> default, similar to WITH_MYSQL_VER=51 or APACHE_PORT=www/apache22
>>>
>>> Doesn't make a difference as there is DEFAULT_MYSQL_VER and
>>> DEFAULT_APACHE_VERSION.
>>
>> The DEFAULT_ knobs give the system the ability to function in a
>> multi-version environment. The WITH_ knobs give the user the ability to
>> override the defaults to make their own systems internally consistent.
>> Whenever I set up a package-building system I always specify a bunch of
>> WITH_ values for certain key dependencies. I know that it works.
>>
>>>> I have been advocating for this for years. IMO we shouldn't have *any*
>>>> unversioned ports for things that have multiple simultaneous versions
>>>> supported. I've actually done this for the things I support (most
>>>> notably bind*) for a long time, and have never had a single user complaint.
>>>
>>> Not too hard for leaf ports. But with ports that are depended on, there
>>> is always a default, whether it's named that way or not. You're just
>>> changing the problem slightly:
>>
>> Not slight at all. I have dealt with many iterations of mass-updates to
>> many systems caused by the silliness we're talking about here. If
>> everyone affected by the lang/php debacle currently had been able to
>> simply set WITH_PHP_VER= 53 prior to the default changing in order to
>> stay at lang/php53, the introduction of lang/php54 would have been a no-op.
>
>
> Perhaps it is a good idea to move php5 -> php54 and create a meta
> control port lang/php5 (like the lang/python port).
With respect to those involved, the lang/python port is a special kind
of problem. In cleaning up some systems where different people had done
updates at different times in the past I ran into problems where
lang/python was installed along with one or more (conflicting)
lang/pythonNN ports. Unraveling that caused a non-zero amount of pain.
The whole concept of category/portname where there are multiple versions
of portname is flawed. The DEFAULT_PORTNAME_VER mechanism works just
fine, especially for dependencies.
One thing that would make this easier for users is to flag the default
version somewhere, probably the pkg-descr, so that it's easier for users
faced with multiple fooNN ports to figure out which one to install.
> This will give the maintainer the ability to bump the php version and
> users the ability to define PHP53 as default in make.conf.
> As advantage users don't have to user other tools to fix dependencies
> and paths in /var/db/pkg/*
You don't need an unversioned port to do that. Witness the various
versions of berkeley db.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
