Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 11:33:14 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 218030] [New port] devel/hhdate: A date and time library based on the C++11 (and beyond) <chrono> header Message-ID: <bug-218030-13-tZHr2rd6jT@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-218030-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-218030-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D218030 --- Comment #7 from Michael Gmelin <grembo@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Andreas Sommer from comment #5) Portrevisions are not for versioning upstream but for marking progress in a port. Thus, a new port never has one set and every change which isn't coming from upstream will increase that counter. So what I would suggest is: - You remove portrevision - You remove the github commit in the Makefile, so it actually checks out version 2.1.0 from upstream - You add the diff between upstream and 2.1.0 as a patch in files That way it's very clear what's going on in the port. Once upstream tags a = new version, you can get rid of the patch. Regadring USE_CXXSTD: This is supposed to modify CXXFLAGS for you to select= the correct standard. I don't like the explicit use of "clang++" in the Makefil= e. Maybe it would make more sense to put create Makefile.in in files and insta= ll that in post-extract into the ports workdir. Then your test target in the Makefile would get super trivial. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-218030-13-tZHr2rd6jT>