On 2013/08/13 02:31, Vadim Zhukov wrote:
> >> >> -RUN_DEPENDS-gtk=${PKGNAME-main}:net/transmission,-main \
> >> >> +RUN_DEPENDS-gtk=${BUILD_PKGPATH} \
> >> >
> >> > No, we don't want the PSEUDO_FLAVORS to make their way into the
> >> > dependency.
> >>
> >> And I do not see PSEUDO_FLAVORS landing in packing list.
> >> This is with BUILD_PKGPATH being used:
> >>
> >> $ FLAVOR=no_gtk SUBPACKAGE=-qt make print-plist | fgrep pkgpath
> >> @comment pkgpath=net/transmission,-qt cdrom=yes ftp=yes
> >
> > $ FLAVOR=no_gtk make show=BUILD_PKGPATH
> > net/transmission,no_gtk
>
> Yes. And what? PSEUDO_FLAVORS do not do their way to packaging list
> (as I showed above), thus inter-package dependencies will be the
> same. Where is the problem? And, if is there, should we change all
> the (BUILD|BASE)_PKGPATH entries in the tree back to hardcoded
> ones?
A pseudo-flavour is only allowed to enable/disable certain subpackages.
but with this diff applied, setting the pseudo-flavour changes how
RUN_DEPENDS-gtk and RUN_DEPEND-qt are set. This isn't permitted and
PLIST_DB will complain if you rebuild with the various flavours..
$ FLAVOR=no_qt SUBPACKAGE=-gtk make show=RUN_DEPENDS-gtk
transmission-2.82:net/transmission,no_qt devel/desktop-file-utils
x11/gtk+2,-guic
$ SUBPACKAGE=-gtk make show=RUN_DEPENDS-gtk
transmission-2.82:net/transmission, devel/desktop-file-utils x11/gtk+2,-guic
