[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