https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=271673
j.david.li...@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |j.david.li...@gmail.com
--- Comment #54 from j.david.li...@gmail.com ---
Some other languages, notably gcc, have some more volatile versions that can't
be fully supported labelled -devel in the ports tree. E.g., lang/gcc14 vs.
lang/gcc14-devel.
Maybe it would be worthwhile to add newer versions of Python to the tree as
lang/python312-devel or (to be *extremely* clear) lang/python312-unsupported to
indicate that they aren't a part of the full ports Uses/versioning scheme yet.
This would give a substantive leg up to users who only need the newer versions
to bootstrap a venv.
As a test, I tried setting "DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python=3.45 python3=3.45" and I
got an error immediately. It looks like the same would happen for a suffixed
version; the Makefile won't find it.
If that existing error isn't satisfactory, it seems like it would be possible
to get Mk/Uses/python.mk to validate the version chosen and kick out a "please
meditate on the meaning of the word 'unsupported'" message if a port tries to
USES= or a builder tries to DEFAULT_VERSIONS= an unsupported version. It
already has similar warnings about Python 2.7.
Could even reiterate that with appropriately dire warnings in the pkg-message
for unsupported versions.
It may not be possible to get it to the point that no one will ever try
"DEFAULT_VERSIONS+= python3=3.12-unsupported" in their make.conf and then
complain that it's not supported. People are going to people. But hopefully it
would be more of an occasional amusement and less of an ongoing hassle. And it
might well happen less often than "How come Python 3.12 has been out this long
and FreeBSD doesn't have it yet?"
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
