[MacPorts] #48937: New port: Bazel
MacPorts
noreply at macports.org
Wed May 17 17:14:22 UTC 2017
#48937: New port: Bazel
-------------------------+--------------------------------
Reporter: ahh | Owner: macports-tickets@…
Type: submission | Status: new
Priority: Normal | Milestone:
Component: ports | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
Port: bazel |
-------------------------+--------------------------------
Comment (by RootFunction):
Listed below are my responses to the proposed changes. I'll upload a new
Portfile shortly.
* When deleting `${distpath}` in post-destroot, my intention was to free
up disk space as the source and documentation files had already been
copied over. If it's expected that users are supposed to use `port clean
--dist` or `port reclaim`, then I'm fine with leaving the distfiles. I see
MacPorts periodically reminds users to run `port reclaim` after running
`sudo port selfupdate` anyway.
* Good point. I didn't think of name clashes in `${workpath}`.
* When running the compile script without `sudo`, I found the build always
failed due to problems with symlinks. It turns out I should have been
using `bash` instead of `sh` though, so with that change `sudo` is no
longer needed. The issue with stderr is that the compile script writes all
sorts of minor warning messages there, and `exec` throws an error if
anything is written to stderr and not subsequently redirected. This
failure then gets propagated to the build phase, which causes the entire
port installation to fail unnecessarily. Since I'm not interested in
parsing the text written to stderr or stdout, I opted for the
`ignorestderr` option rather than redirecting stderr. It's my
understanding that every printed message from each phase gets written into
the debug log anyway.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/48937#comment:15>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS
More information about the macports-tickets
mailing list