On 2018/01/26 17:17, mazocomp wrote: > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 02:56:11PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2018/01/26 16:36, mazocomp wrote: > > > +Flavor wx - build with W|X reliance. > > > > Of course we have thought about this before! But it's not as simple as > > you propose. Done in the way you suggest as a simple either/or flavour > > is going to cause too many problems and confusion with dependent ports > > and isn't acceptable. > > > > Maybe we could consider something that produces two binaries, one with > > wxneeded as "/usr/local/bin/pythonX.Y-wx" that we can use for things that > > need webkit modules etc, and one without wxneeded as the standard > > "pythonX.Y". > > > > Hm, every port which relies on W|X will be patched to use python*-wx > binary, won't it? Sounds great.
Yes, that's part of the work that somebody wanting this would need to do. (Actually patching shouldn't be too bad, identifying the ports which need it is the trickier part). Looking back at my notes, it was needed for things that use certain things with py-cryptography as well as the webkit things (when I had a local diff to disable W+X mappings in CFFI, trying to use https with py-requests broke - https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=147566712513359&w=2 / https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=147618177012319&w=2).
