Re: Why did devel/bison grow a dependency on xz?

[is%netbsd.org@localhost]

On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 08:35:54PM -0500, Eric Schnoebelen wrote:
> 
> I'm curious why devel/bison grew a dependency on archivers/xz?
> 
> The dependency is an implicit one, based on setting EXTRACT_SUFX
> to .tar.xz.  
> 
> I guess the question is, why was it essential to create the
> dependency when bison is still also being made available as a
> "traditional" .tar.gz?
> 
> I encountered this while trying to bring a(n admittedly antique)
> SS20 running NetBSD 2.1 up to date using pkgsrc-2012Q3.  The
> poor little beast spent a couple of days trying to build
> gcc-3.4, so it could build xz, which then failed to build. And
> building xz was effectively pointless, as the bison sources were
> available as .tar.gz.
> 
> Objections to reverting devel/bison to using the more
> "traditional" .tar.gz tarball?

Well, you buy less dependency with more airtime (well, ether time).
Still, I wouldn't object as an editor is one of the basic tools
that you need early when configuring a new system...

But I wonder how difficult it to would be to support a multitude of
EXTRACT_SUFXes, being chosen by a preference in mk.conf or maybe by 
extraction tools already being installed in the build environment.

Regards,
        -is