On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 01:01:42PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 14.03.2019 11:40, Hiroki Sato wrote:
>
> > Koichiro Iwao <m...@freebsd.org> wrote
> > in <20190314031726.aaspgwdcuithh...@icepick.vmeta.jp>:
> >
> > me> Hi,
> > me>
> > me> If a port have runtime dependency on bin/convert command of ImageMagick
> > me> but whichever ImageMagick{6,7}{,-nox11} are OK, how port Makefile should
> > me> be written?
> > me>
> > me> ImageMagick6 and 7 conflicts each other. I want to respect user's
> > me> choice which ImageMagick to use.
> >
> > There is no easy solution to solve it completely because currently
> > package dependency is solved in a strict manner including package
> > names and version numbers, not only existence of specific files.
> > Creating multiple ports which depend on each software or using
> > FLAVORS to make it easier is a way to provide packages with every
> > possible combinations of dependency and let one to choose.
>
> OTOH, one still may create a port depending on existence of specific file
> and fetching another port automatically in case of file absence.
> It works just fine for those using ports as primary source, not packages.
>
> And yes, if one uses packages, it is forced to live with "default" versions
> including dependencies or build its own pkg repo.
In this case, I think FLAVORS don't fit but that's OK.
Regarding FLAVORS, is it possible to depend on any of FLAVORS, not on
one specific FLAVORS? For example, a port requires some command written
in python but python version doesn't matter.
--
meta <m...@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"
