[Midnightbsd-users] ugly method to test port dependencies

[Chris Reinhardt]

On 8/15/07, Stevan Tiefert <stevan_tiefert_midnight at yahoo.de> wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I am asking if my method of finding port dependencies is usable. I think
> it is :-)
>
> I do a
>
> pkg_delete \*
>
> then I delete the Distfiles and Packages or packages directory.
>
> On this I got mports to do all from the beginning. My naked system. The
> problem of not using cached precompiled packages appeared during libXft.
> During make libXft recognized that Xrender.h (xorg-libraries was not
> installed) was not on my system. Then I had to compile xorg-libraries
> manually before compiling libXft. When I deleted everything with
> pkg_delete  \* and made a make install and using the precompiled cached
> packages the error didn't appeared. That is the reason why the Packages
> or packages directory should be deleted.
>
> Then I perform a make install and then I wait until it succed or an
> error appears...
>
> I know it is slow because of not using precompiled packages, but I think
> it is than possible to find every missing dependencies.
>
> With regards and awaiting your respons

I'm not entirely sure what your question is, but I'll share a few
thoughts on the cached-install concept.

Basically, I'm not sure it is going to stay.  It was originally added
because someone (I forget who, could very well be me) said, "Hey we
could do this!"   As time has gone by, it has been shown to have
problems in several edge cases.  I'm not sure if you've run into one
of those, but it sounds like it.

cached-install is an optimization that most people don't need.  It
only saves you time if you are installing and deinstalling software
often.  Most people install something and /use/ it.  Most
optimizations are really just cheats, and this is no exception.

-- 
Chris Reinhardt - chris.reinhardt at gmail.com