On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 08:36:09AM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
> Le Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 08:04:51AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb a écrit :
> > On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> > > On August 4, 2025 11:37:56 AM GMT+02:00, Matthieu Herrb <matthieu@openbsd.org> wrote:
> > > >On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 11:24:28AM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 10:55:10AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote:
> > > >> > Hi,
> > > >> > 
> > > >> > Since wlroots upstreams has decided to include the library version
> > > >> > number in  its name, managing dependencies on wlroots over updates
> > > >> > (and 0.19.0 is ready) has become a bit annoying.
> > > >> > 
> > > >> > The diff below intruduces a wlroots module and uses it in the current
> > > >> > ports depending on wlroots.
> > > >> > 
> > > >> > Comments? Ok?
> > > >> 
> > > >> I think you could simplify this by making it explicit in the module instead of
> > > >> its consumers.
> > > >> 
> > > >> +               wayland/wlroots>=${MODWLR_VERSION_MAIN}
> > > >> 
> > > >> Also that will not prevent having to bump all consumers when wlroots
> > > >> is updated.
> > > >
> > > >Generally the consumers needs to be updated to catch up with wlroots
> > > >API breakage anyways. But I'd like to simplify the work.
> > > 
> > > Sure. But I still think managing LIB_DEPENDS in the module would simplify things.
> > > And as a matter of fact we should do the same with WANTLIB. 
> > > 
> > 
> > New version, provinding automatic LIB_DEPENDS and WANTLIB handling:
> 
> i'd be fine with that version (which reads okay to me), but iirc modules
> do generally set MODMODULE_LIB_DEPENDS and MODMODULE_WANTLIB, and
> consumers add those to their WANTLIB/LIB_DEPENDS. though that's more
> verbose..

It depends actually.
MODMODULE_*_DEPENDS is nice when you don't want to always add to LDEP or WANTLIB.
Like with lang/python.
But with some you always want to append those.
Like with security/heimdal.

-- 
Antoine