From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 9 23:13:19 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69EDF106566B for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 23:13:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from nk11p00mm-asmtp003.mac.com (nk11p00mm-asmtp003.mac.com [17.158.161.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 489388FC0C for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 23:13:19 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from cswiger1.apple.com (unknown [17.209.4.71]) by nk11p00mm-asmtp003.mac.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-23.01(7.0.4.23.0) 64bit (built Aug 10 2011)) with ESMTPSA id <0M2800GERJ5EXI80@nk11p00mm-asmtp003.mac.com> for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2012 23:12:51 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.6.7498,1.0.260,0.0.0000 definitions=2012-04-09_03:2012-04-09, 2012-04-09, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1012030000 definitions=main-1204090287 From: Chuck Swiger In-reply-to: <4F836A65.7080402@herveybayaustralia.com.au> Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 16:12:49 -0700 Message-id: References: <4F7E498E.7070007@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <4F804679.2040803@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <4F80D4F9.9020207@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <4F836A65.7080402@herveybayaustralia.com.au> To: Da Rock X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba34-3.4.14 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 23:13:19 -0000 Hi-- On Apr 9, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Da Rock wrote: > To drag this up again, I was thinking about the number of cases I've found like this recently, and I was considering what the most appropriate action to take here. This one is obviously controversial, and I didn't have the time to do more or test further, but for future reference I'd like some clarification. > > I'd say a PR is not really appropriate as a response to an issue such as this (unless the maintainer offers no response at all), but should I create a patch to assist the maintainer? Or is that over doing it? > > If I were to create a patch, what is the correct (usable) procedure? And for something like this it would be an adjustment to BUILD_DEPENDS, correct? If you think there is a missing dependency, then doing send-pr with the fix is a reasonable procedure. However, you might first want to look into what was different in your case from pointyhat, since the builds of samba-3.x worked fine: http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-9-latest-logs/samba34-3.4.14.log http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-9-latest-logs/samba35-3.5.11.log http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-9-latest-logs/samba36-3.6.3.log Regards, -- -Chuck