[Bug 243937] lang/python38: Fails to package in certain conditions due to DISABLED_EXTENSIONS not working

[b***@freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243937

--- Comment #12 from John Hein <***@liamekaens.com> ---
This patch still applies for python38-3.8.10. And it is still needed.

Reproduce with:

% sudo poudriere bulk -i -C -v -v -j jailX -p portsX x11-toolkits/py-tkinter
databases/gdbm databases/py-sqlite3
.
.
[00:02:28] Entering interactive test mode. Type 'exit' when done.
***@jailX-portsX:~ # cd /usr/ports/lang/python38
***@jailX-portsX:~ # make clean stage check-plist
.
.
===> Checking for items in STAGEDIR missing from pkg-plist
Error: Orphaned: lib/python%%XYDOT%%/lib-dynload/_gdbm.cpython-38.so
Error: Orphaned: lib/python%%XYDOT%%/lib-dynload/_sqlite3.cpython-38.so
Error: Orphaned: lib/python%%XYDOT%%/lib-dynload/_tkinter.cpython-38.so
===> Checking for items in pkg-plist which are not in STAGEDIR
===> Error: Plist issues found.
*** Error code 1


And now that python39 is in the ports tree, it fails the same way.

[b***@freebsd.org]

John Hein <***@liamekaens.com> has asked freebsd-python (Nobody)
<***@FreeBSD.org> for maintainer-approval:
Bug 243937: lang/python38: Fails to package in certain conditions due to
DISABLED_EXTENSIONS not working
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243937

Attachment 225585: [patch] fix broken disable modules - py38+39 (v3)
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=225585&action=edit



--- Comment #13 from John Hein <***@liamekaens.com> ---
Created attachment 225585
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=225585&action=edit
[patch] fix broken disable modules - py38+39 (v3)

Update patch to include python39.

No change to patch for python38.

QA:
portlint - ok (no new warnings)
testport - ok (11/stable amd64)

[b***@freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243937

John Hein <***@liamekaens.com> changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #211437|0 |1
is obsolete| |
Attachment #211437|maintainer-approval?(python |
Flags|@FreeBSD.org) |
Attachment #225585| |maintainer-approval?(python
Flags| |@FreeBSD.org)

--- Comment #13 from John Hein <***@liamekaens.com> ---
Created attachment 225585
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=225585&action=edit
[patch] fix broken disable modules - py38+39 (v3)

Update patch to include python39.

No change to patch for python38.

QA:
portlint - ok (no new warnings)
testport - ok (11/stable amd64)

[b***@freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243937

John Hein <***@liamekaens.com> changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |patch

--- Comment #14 from John Hein <***@liamekaens.com> ---
Since Modules/Setup* has been the way to disable modules for a while now (see
previous comments), python3.10 will likely need this as well when it gets in
the ports tree.

[b***@freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243937

Kubilay Kocak <***@FreeBSD.org> changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://bugs.freebsd.org/bu
| |gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2561
| |50
Keywords|patch |

--- Comment #15 from Kubilay Kocak <***@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to John Hein from comment #14)

Thanks for the update John, will re-review this today

[b***@freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243937

Kubilay Kocak <***@FreeBSD.org> changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |needs-patch
Assignee|***@FreeBSD.org |***@FreeBSD.org
Flags| |maintainer-feedback?(jcfyec
| |***@liamekaens.com)

--- Comment #16 from Kubilay Kocak <***@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #15)

John, could you please you apply your changes to all lang/python* ports that
currently contain DISABLED_EXTENSIONS, and confirm QA passes for those too.

Also, since packaging doesnt fail in all cases, I believe we should be bumping
PORTREVISION for all of them too.