Hi, I checked in a version bump of ghc to 6.8.2 yesterday. The portfile is in the svn repo, but someone emailed me to say that it did not appear in their dports tree. I notice as well that it is missing from the "available ports" on the web page. Did something go awry or should just advise people to wait until some script syncs things up? Best Wishes, Greg
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Gregory Wright <gwright@antiope.com> wrote:
Hi,
I checked in a version bump of ghc to 6.8.2 yesterday. The portfile is in the svn repo, but someone emailed me to say that it did not appear in their dports tree. I notice as well that it is missing from the "available ports" on the web page.
Did something go awry or should just advise people to wait until some script syncs things up?
Looks like theres a problem with the port, from the latest PortIndex mailing Total number of ports parsed: 4543 Ports successfully parsed: 4542 Ports failed: 1 Failed to parse file lang/ghc/Portfile: Error evaluating variants So you've got somthing wrong with the variants, I guess its: variant no_opengl { configure.args-append --disable-opengl configure.args-append --disable-glut } which should be: variant no_opengl { configure.args-append --disable-opengl configure.args-append --disable-glut } lint also gives a lot of warnings: ---> Verifying Portfile for ghc Warning: Line 4 should be a newline (after PortSystem) Warning: Line 21 has trailing whitespace before newline Warning: Variant no_opengl does not have a description Warning: Patchfile patch-configure.ac does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-Makefile does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-base-base.cabal does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-base-base.buildinfo.in does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-base-configure.ac does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-base-aclocal.m4 does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-hpc-Setup.hs does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-hpc-hpc.cabal does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-hpc-hpc.buildinfo.in does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-hpc-configure.ac does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-hpc-aclocal.m4 does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-rts-posix-FileLock.c does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" Warning: Patchfile patch-libraries-Cabal-Distribution-Simple-Configure.hs does not follow the source patch naming policy "patch-*.diff" ---> 0 errors and 16 warnings found. Cheers Adam
On Mar 4, 2008, at 4:00 PM, Adam Mercer wrote:
Failed to parse file lang/ghc/Portfile: Error evaluating variants
It's because portindex runs on a 10.5 ppc machine, and the ghc port specifically errors out on that platform. I've checked in an update that wraps the error return in a pre-fetch block which fixes it. -- Daniel J. Luke +========================================================+ | *---------------- dluke@geeklair.net ----------------* | | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | +========================================================+ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | +========================================================+
Hi Adam, On Mar 4, 2008, at 4:00 PM, Adam Mercer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Gregory Wright <gwright@antiope.com> wrote:
Hi,
I checked in a version bump of ghc to 6.8.2 yesterday. The portfile is in the svn repo, but someone emailed me to say that it did not appear in their dports tree. I notice as well that it is missing from the "available ports" on the web page.
Did something go awry or should just advise people to wait until some script syncs things up?
Looks like theres a problem with the port, from the latest PortIndex mailing
Total number of ports parsed: 4543 Ports successfully parsed: 4542 Ports failed: 1
Failed to parse file lang/ghc/Portfile: Error evaluating variants
So you've got somthing wrong with the variants, I guess its:
variant no_opengl { configure.args-append --disable-opengl configure.args-append --disable-glut }
which should be:
variant no_opengl { configure.args-append --disable-opengl configure.args-append --disable-glut }
I am a bit confused by this since the Portfile built successfully. Does portindex enforce a stricter syntax or is it this just a quirk?
lint also gives a lot of warnings:
---> Verifying Portfile for ghc Warning: Line 4 should be a newline (after PortSystem) Warning: Line 21 has trailing whitespace before newline Warning: Variant no_opengl does not have a description Warning: Patchfile patch-configure.ac does not follow the source patch <snip>
I'll canonicalize the patch names at the next minor revision. Best Wishes, Greg
Hi Daniel, On Mar 4, 2008, at 4:05 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
On Mar 4, 2008, at 4:00 PM, Adam Mercer wrote:
Failed to parse file lang/ghc/Portfile: Error evaluating variants
It's because portindex runs on a 10.5 ppc machine, and the ghc port specifically errors out on that platform.
I've checked in an update that wraps the error return in a pre-fetch block which fixes it.
Thank you for the explanation, and the fix. Best Wishes, Greg
participants (3)
-
Adam Mercer
-
Daniel J. Luke
-
Gregory Wright