Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

Change python from a run to a build dep of www/node
ClosedPublic

Authored by asomers on Jun 2 2016, 10:16 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 15 2024, 11:28 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 20 2024, 10:49 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 2 2024, 5:48 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 2 2024, 9:59 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 30 2024, 11:29 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 30 2024, 11:27 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 27 2024, 12:59 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 24 2024, 4:46 AM
Subscribers

Details

Summary

Change python from a run to a build dep of www/node. The current version of
node doesn't install any Python files.

Diff Detail

Repository
rP FreeBSD ports repository
Lint
No Lint Coverage
Unit
No Test Coverage
Build Status
Buildable 4090
Build 4133: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

asomers retitled this revision from to Change python from a run to a build dep of www/node.
asomers updated this object.
asomers edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)
asomers added a reviewer: pi.
asomers added a subscriber: brd.

You should bump PORTREVISION so that the package gets rebuilt and the runtime dependency gets dropped.

bhughes added inline comments.
www/node/Makefile
5

FYI, the port is currently at 6.2.1_1, so you probably want to update the patch and bump the PORTREVISION again.

Resolve conflicts with recent commits

If all that is needed is that small change, please don't bother with the update, this can be done easily.

Has this change maintainer approval ?

Has this change maintainer approval ?

Yes, it does :)

The maintainer approved this review by email. Now I just need approval from a ports committer.

The UI of phabricator really isn't my thing, sorry if I look confused. Do you need approval from a ports committer or do you need a commit from a ports committer ?

pi edited edge metadata.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Jun 15 2016, 8:35 PM

I'm a src committer, so I only need approval from a ports committer. Thanks pi.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

I guess it's too late to mention that the other www/node* ports could benefit from the same change? :P

In D6699#143973, @bradleythughes_fastmail.fm wrote:

I guess it's too late to mention that the other www/node* ports could benefit from the same change? :P

I didn't think of that at the time, because I don't use any of those ports. But in hindsight it looks like they could all use the same change.

@bradleythughes_fastmail.fm Do you think it is worth doing since all of them are going to expire? Except for www/node4, that one is probably worth doing.