On Saturday, 3 August 2013 12:32:45 Marcus von Appen wrote: > ...at the same time. > > Use PKGNAMEPREFIX/SUFFIX for python ports > > - this is a clean up task (which should be done regardless of everything > else). Some python modules miss the prefix, making it impossible to > install them for multiple python versions at the same time
I think not all python based ports should use PKGNAMEPREFIX/SUFFIX. Those are ports who's main contribution is a bin/ and not libraries. In these cases the use of python is largely incidental. Two example are devel/eric4 (there is an eric5 that supports python3) and ports-mgmt/portbuilder. > Support for non-CPython implementations: > > - A mid-term goal should be to offer support PyPy in USE_PYTHON, etc. > This can introduce a new PYTHON_PKGNAMEPREFIX and SUFFIX and should > have only a minimal impact on implementing the change, once everything > else has been done. I don't think we need to limit the scope to only PyPy, there is also IronPython and Jython (perhaps longer term goals). I have the following suggestions for PYTHON_PKGNAMEPREFIX: - ppyXY for PyPy - p3pyXY for PyPy3 - ipyXY for IronPython - jpyXY for Jython where XY is the implementation version. > 4) Support for non-CPython implementations > > A rather small task; will mainly involve marking ports as not working > under PyPy. Can you please clarify this? Are you proposing: - marking all ports as not working under PyPy, or - those ports that fail to build/install under PyPy or - those ports that do not run under PyPy (this will require some form of testing the ports after installation). I'll happily act as liaison between the Python/FreeBSD PyPy teams if needed. Thank you for undertaking this fixup of python ports :-D Regards
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
