[Gack: devel/cmake needs devel/py-sphinx by default and devel/llvm80 needs both devel/cmake and devel/py-pshinx18 by default.]
On 2020-May-15, at 11:59, Mark Millard <marklmi at yahoo.com> wrote: > > On 2020-May-15, at 11:05, bob prohaska <fbsd at www.zefox.net> wrote: > >> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 01:49:21PM -0300, Danilo G. Baio wrote: >>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 08:19:22AM -0700, bob prohaska wrote: >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:33:10AM -0700, Mark Millard via freebsd-ports >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Some building and isntalling had to occur prior to the >>>>> textproc/py-sphinx18 build attempt, possibly from >>>>> prior session(s) of building and installing. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> In this case x11/xorg was the first port attempted in a new >>>> ports tree. The only "prior sessions" would have been within >>>> the dependencies of x11/xorg. Is that resolvable by poudriere? >>>> >>>>> textproc/py-sphinx18 is new as of 2020-May-11. >>>>> The devel/llvm[16789]0 ports require textproc/py-sphinx18 . >>>>> Only about 26 ports require textproc/py-sphinx18 but >>>>> I'll not list the others. >>>>> >>>>> textproc/py-sphinx has been around longer and has >>>>> 142 ports that require it. I'll not list them. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> textproc/py-sphinx18/Makefile lists: >>>>> >>>>> CONFLICTS_INSTALL= py*-sphinx >>>>> >>>>> textproc/py-sphinx/Makefile lists: >>>>> >>>>> CONFLICTS_INSTALL= py*-sphinx18 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, for example, indirectly the devel/llvm[16789]0 >>>>> ports conflict with at least 142 other ports because >>>>> of the textproc/py-sphinx* difference in requirements. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The conflict is real and limits what combinations >>>>> of ports you may have installed at the same time. >>>> >>>> I'll try deinstalling the conflicting port and hope >>>> it won't be required later.... >>> >>> It seems that just devel/llvm80 is pulling sphinx18 when building >>> x11/xorg. >>> >>> Try disabling DOCS option on devel/llvm80 for now. >>> >>> I've opened a PR to track this issue: >>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246487 >>> >> >> Wish I'd known it was only the DOCS option! Too late now, >> sphinx18 is deinstalled and llvm80 is building. > > What? llvm80 requires textproc/py-sphinx18 (when > the options cause such), not textproc/py-sphinx . > Deleting textproc/py-sphinx18 and building > devel/llvm80 will try to rebuild/install > textproc/py-sphinx18 unless the options are > set to avoid needing textproc/py-sphinx18 . > > To build devel/llvm80 it would be > textproc/py-sphinx that would be deinstalled first > so that textproc/py-sphinx18 could be built and > installed during the build. > > After devel/llvm80 is installed, textproc/py-sphinx18 > would be uninstalled so that textproc/py-sphinx could > be built/installed when xorg is re-tried with llvm80 > already installed. I did not trace down other dependencies but now looking a little (leaving options at defaults): devel/cmake needs devel/py-sphinx by default and devel/llvm80 needs both devel/cmake and devel/py-pshinx18 by default. (xorg need not bein involved: just building devel/llvm[16789]0 has the issue.) Thus the sequence for default options may need to be something like: *) Starting without textproc/py-sphinx18 installed A) build textproc/py-sphinx and devel/cmake and install devel/cmake ( py-sphinx can be via indirection through devel/cmake ) (cmake does not have a run-time dependency on textproc/py-sphinx as far as I can tell.) B) uninstall textproc/py-sphinx so that textproc/py-sphinx18 can be built and installed C) build textproc/py-shpyinx18 and devel/llvm80 and install devel/llvm80 ( py-sphinx18 can be via indirection through devel/llvm80 ) D) uninstall textproc/py-sphinx18 so that either textproc/py-sphinx* can be installed if needed E) build xorg. (Since I use devel/poudriere-develto build packages and then install just packages for things that I run, I do not have to do such explicit conflict management for build-time conflicts.) Of course, figuring out options to change the status of also may avoid having some of the dependencies and so avoid some conflicts. >> This is probably a dumb question, but is there some way >> to learn at the outset what conflicts need to be worked >> around? Something like a "make conflicts" target? Seemingly >> it could be done by hand, but that promises to be tedious. > > Not that will tell you what combinations of > options lead to what combinations of required > build or run prerequisites: That could be > a lot of combinations to cover. It is also > dependent on poudriere-like-building vs. not > for build prerequisites having conflicts > involved or not. > > If one is familiar enough to see potential > conflicts in lists of dependencies there are > the makefile targets: > > run-depends-list, build-depends-list > Print a list of all the compile and run > dependencies, and dependencies of those > dependencies, by port directory. > > all-depends-list Print a list of all dependencies for the port. > > pretty-print-run-depends-list, pretty-print-build-depends-list > Print a list of all the compile and run > dependencies, and dependencies of those > dependencies, by port name and version. > > (but no "all" variant for pretty-print-* ?). > What is listed would depend on the options > specified. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar) _______________________________________________ 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"
